■■■■:■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ 

m    wm 


1 


n 
n 


n 


H 


I 


BKfl 

■H 


IfilS 


1  HI 

UHnM  till 


ititfii 


illlll 

HP 


IRllfttfr 

n 


■■I 


'■'■■  111  -■' 

Ill  111 ■■■ 

:w,.:i.-,;;-,;     .: 


L 


IHWHiiii 


wwmm 


IffiffliliMIS  Us  ffi 


This  book  must  not 
be  taken  from  the 
Library  building. 


Form  No.  471 


WZMZ5 


«&&* 


,r*u  * 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2012  with  funding  from 

University  of  North  Carolina  at  Chapel  Hill 


http://archive.org/details/cottonplantitshiuni] 


Q>(o33 


•  •» 


54th  Congress,  >  HOUSE  OF  REPEESE 

2d  Session.        ) 


\     No.  267. 


Bulletin  No.  33. 

U.  S.  DEPARTMENT  OF  AGRICULTURE. 

OFFICE    OF    EXPERIMENT    STATIONS. 


It 


THE 


COTTON  PLANT: 


ITS  HISTORY,  BOTANY.  CHEMISTRY,  CULTURE, 
ENEMIES,  AND  USES. 


Prepared  under  the  supervision  of  A.  C.  True,  Ph.  D., 
Director  of  the  Office  of  Experiment  Stations. 

WITH  AN  INTRODUCTION.  BY 

OHAKLES  ¥.  DABNEY,  Jr.,  Ph.  D., 

ASSISTANT    SECRETARY    OF    AGtRICULTUR-l 


WASHINGTOK: 

GOVERNMENT   PRINTING   OFFICE. 
1896. 


V. 


v 


4  CONTENTS. 

Chemistry  op  cotton — Continued. 

Seed t 

Fertilizing  constituents 94 

Proximate  constituents 95 

Miscellaneous  chemical  studies 95 

Cottou-seed  products 96 

Cottou-seed  hulls 97 

Cotton-seed  hran  and  cotton-seed  feed 98 

Cotton-seed  kernels 99 

Cotton-seed  cake 100 

Cotton-seed  meal 102 

Cotton-seed  oil 102 

Tables  of  analyses 107 

Bibliography 141 

Climatology  and  soils.    By  Milton  Whitney 143 

Introduction 143 

Climate 143 

Soil 153 

Chemical  properties  of  soils 153 

Physical  structure  of  soils 157 

Typical  soils  of  the  cotton  belt 162 

The  manuring  of  cotton.     By  H.  C.  White,  Ph.  D 169 

Historical 169 

Scientific  experiments  bearing  upon  the  manuring  of  cotton 179 

Yield  and  profit  from  the  use  of  fertilizers  on  cotton  as  compared  with 

yield  and  profit  from  unfertilized  soil 180 

Comparative  values  of  commercial  fertilizers  and  home  manures 181 

Kind  of  fertilizer  (chemical  manure)  required  by  or  best  suited  to 

cotton 183 

The  amount  of  fertilizer  per  acre  giving  best  results 188 

Best  mode  of  application  of  fertilizers  to  cotton 189 

Best  time  of  application  of  fertilizers  to  cotton 189 

Miscellaneous  experiments 190 

General  couclusions 191 

Methods  of  manuring  cotton  at  present  in  general  use  in  the  United  States .  194 

Manuring  of  cotton  in  other  couutries 195 

Bibliography 196 

Cultivated  varieties  of  cotton.     By  S.  M.  Tracy,  M.  S 197 

Introduction 197 

American  varieties 198 

Foreign  varieties 210 

Origination  of  varieties 211 

Plant  selection 211 

Saving  seed  from  early  maturing  bolls 212 

Cross  fertilization 212 

Change  of  name 214 

Improvement  and  deterioration  of  varieties 214 

Classification  of  varieties 215 

Relative  values  of  varieties 218 

Bibliography 224 

Culture  of  cotton.     By  Harry  Hammond 225 

Geography  of  the  cotton  belt 225 

Centers  of  cotton  production 226 

The  pine  levels 226 

The  pine-hills  region 233 


CONTENTS.  5 

Culture  of  cotton— Continued.  Page. 

Metamorphic  or  Piedmont  region 237 

Sand-hills  region 240 

The  prairie  region 241 

Oak  and  hickory  region 248 

Bluff  and  brown  loam  table-lands 251 

The  alluvial  region 252 

Red-loam  lands 257 

The  valley  region 257 

The  alpine  regions 258 

General  observations  on  cotton  culture 258 

Drainage 259 

Inelosures 259 

Subsoiling 260 

Rotation 260 

Planting  and  cultivation 261 

Period  of  growth 262 

Shedding  of  forms,  blooms,  and  bolls 263 

Picking 264 

Cost  of  cotton  production 266 

Cotton  production  in  different  States 269 

Experiments  in  cotton  culture  by  the  experiment  stations 271 

Diseases  of  cotton.    By  George  F.  Atkinson,  M.  S 279 

General  nature  of  cotton  diseases 279 

Mosaic  disease,  or  yellow  leaf  blight 279 

Red  leaf  blight... 284 

Shedding  of  bolls -. 285 

Angular  leaf  spot 286 

Frenching 287 

Sore  shin  ;  damping  off;  seedling  rot 292 

Anthracnose 293 

Root  rot  of  cotton  (Ozonium) 300 

Artificial  cultures  of  Ozonium 305 

Cotton-leaf  blight 308 

Areolate  mildew  of  cotton 309 

Cotton-boll  rot 310 

Root  galls  of  cotton 311 

Development  and  metamorphoses 314 

The  insects  which  affect  the  cotton  plant  in  the  United  States. 

By  L.  O.  Howard,  Ph.  D 317 

The  cotton  worm,  or  cotton  caterpillar 320 

General  appearance,  habits,  and  life  history 320 

Parasites  and  natural  enemies 324 

Remedies 325 

The  cotton  boll  worm 328 

General  appearance,  habits,  and  life  history 328 

Natural  enemies 331 

Remedies 331 

The  Mexican  cotton-boll  weevil 335 

General  appearance  and  method  of  work 335 

Distribution 335 

Natural  history  and  habits 336 

Popular  names 339 

Parasites  and  natural  enemies 339 

Remedies 339 

Summary  of  remedies 342 


b  CONTENTS. 

The  insects  which  affect  the  cotton  plant,  etc. — Continued.  Page. 

Other  cotton  insects 343 

Cutworms 343 

Plant  lice 344 

Leaf-feeding  caterpillars 345 

Other  insects  which  damage  the  leaves 346 

Insects  damaging  the  stalk 347 

Insects  injuring  the  boll 348 

The  handling  and  uses  of  cotton.     By  Harry  Hammond 351 

Stalks 351 

Seed  cotton 352 

Storage 352 

Ginning 354 

Baling 360 

Manufacture  and  uses  of  cotton  by-products 365 

Oil 365 

Oil  mills 366 

Oil-mill  products 372 

Present  condition  and  outlook  of  the  cotton-oil  industry 373 

Cost  and  profit  of  the  cotton-oil  industry 374 

Fertilizing  value  of  tbe  seed  and  its  products 376 

Feeding  value  of  cotton  seed  and  its  products 378 

Conclusions 380 

Lint 381 

Marketing 381 

Cost  of  transportation 383 

Distribution 384 

The  feeding  value  of  cotton-seed  products.     By  B.  W.  Kilgore 385 

Composition  of  cotton-seed  products 386 

Digestibility  of  cotton  products 386 

Does  cotton-seed  meal  affect  the  digestibility  of  carbonaceous  foods?.  387 

Feeding  cotton-seed  products  for  beef  production 388 

English  experiments ^ 388 

American  experiments 392 

European  experiments 402 

Effect  of  cotton-seed  products  on  beef  fats 403 

Feeding  cotton-seed  products  to  sheep 403 

English  experiments 403 

American  experiments 406 

European  experiments 408 

Feeding  cotton-seed  products  for  pork  production 408 

Feeding  cotton-seed  products  to  calves 410 

Feeding  cotton-seed  products  to  horses  and  mules 411 

Cotton-seed  products  for  milk  and  butter  production". 411 

American  experiments 411 

European  experiments 414 

Effect  of  cotton-seed  products  on  the  quality  of  butter 415 

Effect  of  cotton-seed  products  on  churnability 419 

Effect  of  cotton-seed  products  on  health  of  animals 419 

Eeferences  to  additional  articles  on  feeding  cotton  products 421 

Supplemental  bibliography  of  cotton 423 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


PLATES. 

Page. 

Pl.      I.  A  cotton  field Frontispiece. 

II.  Chart  showing  production  and  consumption  of  cotton,  1789-1894 42 

III.  Map  of  typical  soil  areas  of  the  cotton  belt  of  the  United  States 226 

IV.  Transformations  of  cotton  hollworm 328 

FIGURES. 

Fig.    1.  Sea  Island  cotton 69 

2.  Upland  cotton 72 

3.  Cotton  fibers 80 

4.  Mosaic  disease 282 

5.  Anthracnose 294 

6.  Root  rot 301 

7.  Areolate  mildew 309 

8.  Root  galls 312 

9.  Egg  of  cotton- worm  moth 321 

10.  Cotton  caterpillar 321 

11.  Cotton-worm  moth 322 

12.  Proboscis  of  cotton- worm  moth 322 

13.  Cotton- worm  egg  parasite 323 

14.  Chalcia  flavipes,  an  important  parasite  of  the  cotton  caterpillar 324 

15.  Skin  of  cotton  caterpillar  attached  to  underside  of  cotton  leaf  by  silk 

spun  about  the  pupaj  of  Euplectrus  comstockii 324 

16.  Pimpla  inquisitor,  one  of  the  principal  parasites  of  the  cotton  cater- 

pillar   325 

17.  Diagram  of  cotton  field  showing  location  of  trap  corn 334 

18.  The  cotton-boll  weevil 335 

19.  Map  showing  distribution  of  the  Mexican  cotton-boll  weevil  in  1895. .  336 

20.  Cotton-boll  weevil;  newly  hatched  larva  in  young  square,  etc 337 

21.  Mature  boll  cut  open,  showing  full-grown  larva,  and  mature  boll  not 

cut,  showing  feeding  punctures  and  oviposition  marks 338 

22.  Late  fall  boll,  showing  how  beetles  hide  between  boll  and  involucre..  338 

23.  Feltia  annexa 344 

24.  Feltia  malefida 344 

25.  Pyrausfa  rantalis 346 

26.  Schistocerca  americana 347 

27.  Cotton-stalk  borer 347 

28.  Homalodisca  coagulata 348 

29.  The  red  bug,  or  cotton  stainer 349 

30.  Appearance  of  different  kinds  of  cotton  bales  on  arrival  at  Trieste, 

Austria-Hungary 361 

31.  The  Bessonette  cylindrical  cotton  bale 363 

32.  Diagram  of  an  oil  mill 369 


LETTER  OF  TRANSMITTAL. 


United  States  Department  of  Agriculture, 

Office  of  Experiment  Stations, 

Washington,  D.  C,  June  15,  1896. 

Sir:  I  have  the  honor  to  transmit  herewith  a  bulletin  on  the  cotton 
plant,  which  includes  summaries  of  information  on  different  topics 
relating  to  this  plant  considered  in  their  agricultural  bearings.  The 
effort  has  been  made  to  present  such  facts  as  would  be  useful  to  the 
students  of  our  agriculture,  to  the  investigators  at  the  experiment  sta- 
tions, and  to  that  increasing  body  of  intelligent  agriculturists  who  are 
interested  in  thoroughly  acquainting  themselves  with  the  past  and 
present  condition  of  our  agricultural  industries,  with  a  view  to  discov- 
ering means  for  their  improvement.  Xo  attempt  has  been  made  to  dis- 
cuss the  problems  of  cotton  manufacture,  the  purpose  being  to  confine 
the  bulletin  strictly  within  agricultural  lines. 

The  introduction  to  the  bulletin  has  been  written  by  C.  W.  Dab- 
ney,  jr.,  Ph.  D.,  Assistant  Secretary  of  Agriculture,  whose  lifelong 
acquaintance  with  the  practical  problems  of  Southern  agriculture  has 
been  supplemented  by  special  studies  of  scientific  questions  relating  to 
the  crops  of  that  region,  particularly  in  connection  with  his  duties  as 
director  of  the  North  Carolina  and  Tennessee  agricultural  experi- 
ment stations. 

The  chapter  on  the  history  and  general  statistics  of  cotton  as  an 
agricultural  plant  has  been  prepared  by  Mr.  ft.  B.  Handy,  of  this  office, 
who  has,  as  far  as  practicable,  examined  the  original  sources  of  informa- 
tion and  carefully  collated  the  literature  of  this  subject.  Many  details 
of  the  earlier  history  of  cotton  are  obscure,  and  their  interpretation 
will  always  remain  largely  a  matter  of  individual  opinion.  The  article 
herewith  is,  however,  a  careful  and  independent  review  of  the  evidence 
available,  and  the  numerous  references  to  the  authorities  will  enable 
the  student  to  examine  the  matter  for  himself  should  he  care  to  pursue 
it  further. 

The  chapter  on  the  botany  of  cotton,  by  Walter  H.  Evans,  Ph.  D.,  of  this 
office,  has  involved  a  very  considerable  amount  of  research,  the  results 
of  which  have  been  very  largely  of  a  negative  character.  An  examina- 
tion of  the  widely  scattered  literature  of  the  histology  and  physiology 
of  agricultural  plants  has  revealed  surprisingly  few  investigations  on 
the  cotton  plant.     The  systematic  botany  of  this  plant  is  also  in  a  very 

9 


10  LETTER    OF    TRANSMITTAL. 

unsatisfactory  state,  and  it  is  quite  difficult  to  make  definite  statements 
which  will  not  be  subject  to  more  or  less  serious  criticism.  For  the  pur- 
pose of  this  bulletin  it  was  deemed  best  to  make  a  concise  and  orderly 
statement  of  the  facts  as  they  appeared  to  the  author  after  a  careful 
review  of  available  literature  without  entering  into  discussion  of  dis- 
puted points. 

The  chapter  on  the  chemistry  of  cotton,  by  Mr.  J.  B.  McBryde,  chemist 
of  the  Tennessee  Agricultural  Experiment  Station,  and  Mr.  W.  H.  Beal, 
of  this  office,  includes  summarized  statements  of  the  results  of  chemical 
investigations  of  the  cotton  plant  and  detailed  tables  of  analyses, 
together  with  a  bibliography  of  the  subject. 

In  the  chapter  on  climatology  and  soils,  by  Prof.  Milton  Whitney, 
chief  of  the  Division  of  Soils  of  this  Department,  general  considerations 
relating  to  the  climate  and  soils  of  the  cotton  belt  of  this  country  have 
been  briefly  stated,  the  results  of  soil  investigations  as  they  affect  the 
problems  of  cotton  culture  have  been  explained,  and  some  typical  soils 
of  different  cotton  regions  have  been  concisely  described.  A  short 
compilation  of  the  results  of  chemical  analyses  of  soils  in  the  cotton 
States,  selected  from  the  large  number  of  analyses  given  by  Prof.  E. 
W.  Hilgard  in  the  Tenth  Census  of  the  United  States,  has  been  added, 
with  a  view  to  indicating  in  a  general  way  what  chemical  analysis  has 
shown  regarding  the  soils  of  this  region. 

The  chapter  on  the  manuring  of  cotton,  by  IT.  C.  White,  Ph.  D., 
president  and  professor  of  chemistry  of  the  Georgia  State  College  of 
Agriculture  and  Mechanic  Arts  and  vice-director  and  chemist  of  the 
Georgia  Agricultural  Experiment  Station,  contains  a  brief  history  of 
the  use  of  fertilizers  for  cotton  and  a  summary  of  the  results  of  experience 
and  experiment  in  manuring  this  crop. 

The  chapter  on  cultivated  varieties  of  cotton,  by  S.  M.  Tracy,  M.  S., 
director  and  botanistof  the  Mississippi  Agricultural  Experiment  Station, 
includes  brief  descriptions  of  the  principal  varieties  cultivated  in  the 
United  States,  with  a  discussion  of  the  ways  of  determining  their  rela- 
tive importance  and  of  the  methods  used  in  the  origination  and  improve- 
ment of  varieties. 

The  chapter  on  the  culture  of  cotton  was  prepared  by  Mr.  Harry 
Hammond,  of  South  Carolina,  author  of  the  article  on  Cotton  Produc- 
tion in  South  Carolina  in  the  Tenth  Census,  and  a  cotton  planter  of 
long  experience.  For  the  purposes  of  this  article  the  cotton  belt  has 
been  divided  into  a  number  of  regions  characterized  by  more  or  less 
uniform  conditions  of  soil  and  climate,  and  the  general  conditions  of 
cotton  culture  in  each  region  have  been  concisely  described.  The  gen- 
eral results  of  experience  in  the  management  of  this  crop  are  also 
stated  and  the  cost  of  production  together  with  other  economic  factors 
affecting  the  great  industry  of  cotton  raising  have  been  briefly  con- 
sidered. It  is  believed  that  this  article  will  afford  the  reader  a  com- 
prehensive view  of  the  present  status  of  cotton  culture  in  this  country. 


LETTER    OF    TRANSMITTAL.  11 

A  brief  summary  is  appended  of  the  relatively  few  experiments  on 
cotton  culture  thus  far  reported  by  the  agricultural  experiment  stations, 
prepared  by  Mr.  J.  F.  Duggar  during  his  connection  with  this  office. 

The  chapter  on  diseases  of  cotton  was  prepared  by  George  F.  Atkin- 
son, M.  S.,  professor  of  botany  in  Cornell  University,  who,  during  his 
connection  with  the  Alabama  Agricultural  Experiment  Station,  con- 
ducted the  most  extensive  investigation  of  these  diseases  thus  far 
attempted.  The  summarized  statements  contained  in  this  article  are 
intended  for  the  general  reader  rather  than  the  specialist. 

The  chapter  on  insects  which  affect  the  cotton  plant  in  the  United 
States,  by  L.  O.  Howard,  Ph.  D.,  Entomologist  of  this  Department,  in- 
cludes a  summary  of  the  principal  results  of  the  extended  investigations 
of  the  Division  of  Entomology  and  of  the  United  States  Entomological 
Commission,  intended  for  the  use  of  the  general  reader.  Of  special 
interest  is  the  account  of  the  investigations  on  the  Mexican  cotton- 
boll  weevil,  recently  conducted  under  Professor  Howard's  supervision. 

The  chapter  on  the  handling  and  uses  of  cotton,  by  Mr.  Harry  Ham- 
mond, treats  of  the  storage,  ginning,  and  baling  of  cotton,  the  manu- 
facture and  uses  of  cotton-seed  meal  and  oil  and  other  by-products,  and 
the  marketing  of  the  lint.  Only  such  information  is  given  in  this 
article  as  was  deemed  to  belong  to  the  agricultural  side  of  the  questions 
relating  to  the  handling  and  use  of  the  cotton  crop. 

The  chapter  on  the  feeding  value  of  cotton-seed  products,  by  Mr.  B. 
W.  Kilgore,  assistant  chemist  of  the  North  Carolina  Agricultural  Exper- 
iment Station,  is  a  summary  of  the  results  of  the  investigations  on  this 
subject  carried  on  at  the  agricultural  experiment  stations  and  kindred 
institutions  in  this  country  and  abroad. 

Throughout  the  bulletin  careful  and  somewhat  complete  references 
to  the  sources  of  information  have  been  made  in  footnotes,  and  a  list 
of  works  which  are  not  thus  referred  to,  but  which  may  be  of  interest 
to  students  of  the  cotton  plant,  is  given  at  the  end  of  the  bulletin. 

The  labor  involved  in  the  final  arrangement  of  material  and  the 
preparation  of  the  bulletin  for  the  press  has  largely  devolved  on  Mr. 
W.  H.  Beal,  of  this  office,  and  a  large  amount  of  work  in  the  collection 
of  literature  and  in  the  working  up  of  details  has  also  been  performed 
by  Mr.  R.  B.  Handy,  of  this  office. 

The  preparation  of  this  somewhat  comprehensive  bulletin  on  the 
cotton  plant  has  involved  a  very  large  amount  of  labor  in  the  colla- 
tion of  materials,  in  the  selection  and  arrangement  of  the  information 
to  be  given  under  each  head,  and  in  the  securing  of  accuracy  and  rea- 
sonable uniformity  in  details.  On  many  topics  long  search  has  revealed 
a  surprising  paucity  of  reliable  information.  It  is  evident  that  thus 
far  very  few  careful  investigations  of  the  cotton  plant  have  been  made. 
A  great  field  of  research  remains  open  to  our  agricultural  experiment 
stations,  on  which  they  have  hardly  begun  to  enter.  When  we  con- 
sider how  vast  are  the  interests  involved  in  the  cotton  industry,  we 


12  LETTER    OF    TRANSMITTAL. 

realize  the  total  inadequacy  of  tlie  efforts  thus  far  put  forth  to  solve 
the  perplexing  problems  confronting  the  cotton  planter.  This  bulletin 
will  have  served  an  important  purpose  if  it  calls  attention  to  the  need 
of  more  thorough  investigation  of  these  problems  and  stimulates  useful 
inquiries  in  this  direction.  The  conditions  under  which  the  workers 
in  our  experiment  stations  are  laboring  largely  prevent  their  making 
comprehensive  surveys  of  the  work  already  done  in  various  lines  before 
attempting  further  investigations.  They  are  compelled  too  often  to 
attack  the  problem  which  seems  most  immediately  pressing  without 
such  preliminary  study  of  its  relations  to  other  problems  as  would 
make  their  work  most  effective  and  success  most  probable.  This  bul- 
letin has  been  prepared  primarily  to  relieve  this  difficulty  as  regards 
the  cotton  plant. 

The  conditions  of  our  agriculture  have  hitherto  induced  superficial 
methods  of  culture  and  handling  of  our  staple  crops.  The  need  of 
greater  attention  to  finer  distinctions  and  nicer  economies  is  beginning 
to  be  at  least  dimly  discerned  by  the  masses  of  our  agricultural  popu- 
lation. As  the  real  situation  becomes  clearer  there  will  undoubtedly 
be  au  increasing  demand  for  such  information  regarding  these  crops  as 
can  be  obtained  only  as  the  result  of  elaborate  and  far-reaching  inves- 
tigations at  our  agricultural  experiment  stations.  It  is  our  present 
duty  to  pave  the  way  for  the  successful  conduct  of  such  investigations 
by  reviewing  the  past  and  carefully  noting  the  conditions  of  the  pres- 
ent, and  to  supply  the  materials  out  of  which  the  master  workmen  of 
the  future  may  construct  lasting  structures  of  practical  truth.  The 
articles  herewith  are  submitted  as  a  contribution  to  this  end,  and  their 
publication  as  Bulletin  No.  33  of  this  office  is  respectfully  recommended. 
Eespectfully, 

A.  C.  True, 

Director. 
Hon.  J.  Sterling  Morton, 

Secretary  of  Agriculture. 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


INTRODUCTION. 

By  Chas.  W.  Dabney,  Jr.,  Ph.  D., 
Assistant  Secretary  of  Agriculture. 

Cotton  is  the  principal  product  of  eight  great  States  of  this  Union, 
and  the  most  valuable  "money  crop"  of  the  entire  country.  Climatic 
conditions  practically  restrict  its  cultivation  to  a  group  of  States  consti- 
tuting less  than  one-fourth  of  the  total  area  of  our  country,  and  yet  the 
value  of  the  annual  crop  is  exceeded  among  cultivated  products  only 
by  corn,  which  is  grown  in  every  state  of  the  Union,  and  occasionally — 
four  years  out  of  the  last  ten — by  wheat.  Cotton  furnishes  the  raw 
material  for  one  of  our  most  important  manufacturing  industries  and 
from  one-fourth  to  one-third  of  our  total  exports. 

Considered  without  reference  to  any  particular  country,  its  economic 
importance  is  far  beyond  numerical  expression ;  for  while  the  total  crop 
of  the  world  is  approximately  ascertainable,  the  effect  of  cotton  upon 
the  commercial  and  social  relations  of  mankind  is  too  far-reaching  for 
estimation.  Of  the  four  great  staples  that  provide  man  with  clothing — 
cotton,  silk,  wool,  and  flax — cotton,  by  reason  of  its  cheapness  and  its 
many  excellencies,  is  rapidly  superseding  its  several  rivals.  Fifty  years 
ago  only  about  2,500,000  bales  of  cotton,  or  less  than  the  present  produc- 
tion of  Texas,  were  annually  converted  into  clothing;  the  spindles  of  the 
world  now  use  over  13,000,000  bales  per  annum.  Yet  less  than  half  the 
people  of  the  world  are  supplied  with  cotton  goods  made  by  modern 
machinery,  and  Edward  Atkinson  has  estimated  that  it  would  require 
annually  a  crop  of  42,000,000  bales  of  500  pounds  each  to  raise  the 
world's  standard  of  consumption  to  that  of  the  principal  nations. 

Cotton  stands  preeminent  among  farm  crops  in  the  ease  and  cheap- 
ness of  its  production,  as  compared  with  the  variety  and  value  of  its 
products.  No  crop  makes  so  slight  a  drain  upon  the  fertility  of  the  soil, 
and  for  none  has  modern  enterprise  found  so  many  uses  for  its  several 
parts.  The  cotton  plant  yields,  in  fact,  a  double  crop — a  most  beautiful 
fiber  and  a  seed  yielding  both  oil  and  feed,  which,  although  neglected 
for  a  long  time,  is  now  esteemed  worth  one-sixth  as  much  as  the  fiber. 
In  addition  to  this,  the  stems  can  be  made  to  yield  a  fiber  which  waits 
only  for  a  machine  to  work  it,  and  the  roots  yield  a  drug.  It  is  entirely 
possible,  therefore,  that  cotton  may  ultimately  be  grown  as  much  for 
these  parts  as  for  the  lint. 

The  history  of  cotton  production  in  the  United  States  differs  from 
that  of  almost  every  other  agricultural  product  in  several  important 

13 


14 


THE    COTTON   PLANT. 


particulars.  For  nearly  three-quarters  of  a  century  slave  labor  was 
almost  exclusively  employed  iu  this  branch  of  agricultural  industry,  and 
an  immense  majority  of  the  colored  people  of  to-day  look  to  it  for  their 
chief  support.  Cotton  was  also  the  great  pioneer  crop  in  the  new  south- 
western States.  Not  only  has  the  westward  movement  of  the  industry 
been  more  rapid  than  that  of  any  other  crop,  but  the  center  of  produc- 
tion has  always  been  farther  in  advance  of  the  center  of  population. 
As  long  ago  as  1839  Mississippi  was  producing  almost  one-fourth  of  the 
entire  crop  of  the  country.  .Recent  years  have  witnessed  an  enormous 
development  in  the  regions  to  the  west,  which  would  have  carried  the 
center  of  production  across  the  Mississippi  River  if  the  cultivation  of 
cotton,  unlike  that  of  wheat  and  corn  and  other  products,  had  not 
taken  a  new  lease  of  life  in  the  older  States  along  the  Atlantic  seaboard, 
where  the  use  of  manures  has  both  extended  the  area  and  increased  the 
production. 

Probably  no  equally  great  industry  was  ever  more  completely  paral- 
yzed or  had  its  future  placed  in  greater  jeopardy  than  cotton  growing 
in  the  United  States  during  the  war  of  1861-1865.  So  great  was  the 
decrease  in  production  which  followed  the  effectual  closing  of  the  ports 
that  only  1  bale  of  cotton  was  grown  in  1864-65  for  every  15  bales 
raised  in  1861-62.  The  chief  menace  to  the  future  of  cotton  production 
lay  in  the  efforts  that  were  put  forth  by  other  cotton- growing  countries 
at  this  time  to  produce  those  particular  varieties  which  had  for  so  long 
given  the  United  States  the  monopoly  of  the  European  markets;  and 
nothing  could  more  completely  demonstrate  the  remarkable  adaptation 
of  our  southern  States  to  the  growing  of  varieties  which  the  experience 
of  generations  has  proved  to  be  the  best  for  manufacturing  purposes 
than  the  fact  that  it  took  them  only  thirteen  years  from  the  end  of  the 
war  to  regain  the  primacy  of  position  which  they  held  at  its  commence- 
ment. 

The  fact  that  only  a  very  small  fraction  of  the  annual  crop  fails  to 
reach  a  market  in  its  raw  state  explains  why  we  have  a  more  continu- 
ous and  authentic  history  of  the  cultivation  of  cotton  in  the  United 
States  than  of  any  other  important  product.  The  ordinary  fluctuations 
to  which  cotton  growing  in  the  United  States  is  subject  have  been  well 
exemplified  in  the  last  ten  years,  as  shown  by  the  following  tables: 


Year. 


Production 

(net  weight) . 


Area. 


Total  value 
of  crop. 


Exports 
(net  weight). 


Value 
of  exports. 


1886-87 

3887-88.... 

1888-89.... 

1889-90.... 

1890-91.... 

1891-92.... 

1892-93.... 

1893-94.... 

1894-95 

1895-96.... 

Total 


Pounds. 
3,  018,  360,  368 
3,  290,  871,  011 
3,  309,  564, 330 

3,  494,  811,  916 

4,  092,  678,  381 
4,  273,  734,  267 
3, 182,  673,  375 

3,  578,  613,  258 

4,  586,  594,  540 
3, 190,  417,  839 


36,  018,  319,  285 


Acres. 

18,  454,  603 
18,641,067 

19,  058,  591 
20, 171,  896 

20,  809,  053 
20,  714,  937 

18,  067,  924 

19,  525,  000 
23,  687,  950 
20, 184,  368 


Dollars. 
309,  381,  938 
337,  972,  453 
354,  454, 340 
402,  951.  814 
369,  568,  858 
326,  513,  298 
262,  252,  286 
274,  479,  637 
287, 120,  818 
260,  338,  096 


Pounds. 
2,  047,  308, 445 
2, 150,  775,  786 
2,  275,  252,  020 
2,  394, 975,  501 
2,  759.  049,  246 
2,  786,  637,  403 
2, 104,  829,  500 

2,  547,  624,  248 

3,  316,  406, 482 
2,  222,  707,  905 


Dollars. 
206,  222,  057 
223.  016  760 
237,  775.  270 
250,  968,  792 
290,  712,  898 
258,  461,  241 
188,  771,  445 
210,  869,  289 
204,  900,  990 
100,  056,  460 


1 19,  931,  539 


•Average. 


3, 185,  033,  538 


24,  605,  566,  536  ;  2,  261,  755,  202 


INTRODUCTION. 


15 


Tear. 

Average 

production 

per  acre. 

Average 

value 

per 

pound. 

Average 

value 
per  acre. 

Per  cent 

of 
crop  ex- 
ported.1 

Per  cent 

of  crop 

retained.1 

Pounds. 
163.  56 
176.  54 
173.  65 
173.  25 
196.  68 
206.  31 
176. 15 
183.  28 
193.  63 
158.  06 

Cents. 
10.25 
10.27 
10.71 
11.53 
9.03 
7.64 
8.24 
7.67 
6.26 
8.16 

Dollars. 
16.76 
18.13 
18.60 
19.98 
17.76 
15.76 
14.51 
14.06 
12.12 
12.90 

67.80 
65.36 
68.75 
68.53 
67.41 
65.20 
66. 13 
71.19 
72.31 
69.67 

32  20 

1887  88  

34  64 

1888-89  

31.25 

1889  90  

31.47 

1890  91 » 

32.59 

1891-92  

34.80 

1892  93  

33.87 

,i893  94 

28.81 

1894-95  

27.69 

1895  96 

30.  33 

180.  71 

8.84 

15.98 

68.31 

31.69 

1  Net  weight. 

These  tables  present  some  very  striking  contrasts.  The  crop  of 
1894-95  is  shown  to  have  been  more  than  half  as  large  again  as  that 
of  1886-87,  while  in  respect  to  value  the  crop  of  1889-90  was  just  as 
much  in  excess  of  that  of  1892-93  or  that  of  1895-96.  While  the  area 
cultivated  fell  nearly  1,900,000  acres  below,  and  rose  more  than  3,700,000 
acres  above,  the  average  for  the  entire  period,  the  wide  variation  in 
the  average  yield  per  acre  played  an  almost  equally  important  part  in 
determining  the  total  amount  of  the  crop.  Yet  it  is  an  interesting  fact 
that  the  fluctuation  in  yield  per  acre,  taking  the  country  as  a  whole,  is 
less  in  the  case  of  cotton  than  in  that  of  almost  any  other  product  of 
the  soil.  This  is  attributable  to  the  greater  uniformity  of  the  climatic 
conditions  obtaining  in  the  cotton  belt  as  compared  with  those  of  other 
sections.  The  rainfall  is  more  constant  in  the  South  than  in  many 
other  sections,  the  changes  of  temperature  from  day  to  day  are  con- 
siderably less  than  at  points  in  more  northern  latitudes,  and  the 
monthly  means  of  temperatures  in  the  growing  season  do  not  vary 
more  than  2°  or  3°  in  the  chief  cotton-growing  districts.  In  fact, 
except  on  the  Pacific  Coast,  there  is  no  portion  of  the  United  States 
where  the  variability  of  the  temperature  is  so  small,  particularly  in 
summer,  as  in  the  Southern  States  and  on  the  Gulf  Coast.  The  increase 
of  sunshine  and  heat  during  the  months  of  August  and  September,  con- 
currently with  the  decrease  of  rainfall,  which  characterize  this  section 
so  distinctly,  are  the  conditions  which  favor  most  the  development  of 
the  cotton  bolls.  The  same  climatic  conditions  render  this  section  of 
our  country  a  most  favored  one  for  a  widely  diversified  agriculture. 

The  average  yield  per  acre  during  the  ten  years  covered  by  the  table 
was  180.71  pounds.  Although  this  may  be  slightly  above  the  normal 
yield  of  the  American  cotton  crop  considered  as  a  whole,  it  can  not  be 
doubted  that  improved  methods  of  cultivation  and  the  increased  use  of 
manures  are  gradually  increasing  the  j>roductiveness  of  the  cotton 
field,  and  that  the  time  is  not  far  distant  when  an  average  of  200 
pounds  per  acre  for  the  entire  cotton  belt  will  no  longer  excite  surprise, 
while  the  yield  of  a  bale  of  500  pounds  will  be  the  standard  of  the  best 
cotton  planters. 


16  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

One  of  the  most  important  facts  shown  above  is  that  over  two-thirds 
of  our  entire  production  of  cotton  is,  and  always  has  been,  exported. 
The  time  was,  indeed,  when  the  proportion  shipped  abroad  was  as 
much  as  80  per  cent,  but  the  increased  production  in  other  countries 
and  the  growth  of  the  cotton  manufacturing  industry  in  our  own  have 
reduced  the  proportion  exported  to  a  little  under  70  per  cent. 

One  of  the  serious  results  of  an  era  of  low  prices  such  as  that 
through  which  the  country  has  been  passing  is  that  if  it  does  not, 
indeed,  entirely  disable  the  farmer,  it  indisposes  him  to  keep  up  the 
fertility  of  his  farm.  But  it  is  when  profits  are  small  that  the  good 
results  accruing  from  the  adoption  of  improved  methods  of  cultivation 
are  most  apparent.  In  this  connection  and  at  this  time,  the  value  to 
the  planter  of  the  work  being  clone  by  the  various  experiment  stations 
and  the  Department  of  Agriculture  will  be  thoroughly  appreciated.  By 
using,  in  the  most  economical  form,  the  fertilizing  materials  of  which 
the  soil  is  really  in  need;  by  disposing  the  surface  of  the  field  and  by 
growing  crops  in  j)roper  rotation  to  prevent  the  excessive  leaching  and 
washing  of  the  soil;  by  the  selection  of  seed  from  plants  exhibiting  the 
most  desirable  qualities;  by  using  the  most  efficient  and  economical 
implements  and  machines  for  working  the  soil;  by  the  prompt  adoption 
of  the  most  approved  methods  of  preventing  the  ravages  of  injurious 
insects  or  the  spread  of  plant  diseases,  the  ordinary  farmer  inay  increase 
his  crop  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  additional  expenditure  bestowed 
upon  it.  By  using  improved  gins,  adapted  to  the  quality  of  the  cotton 
grown  and  the  uses  to  which  it  is  to  be  put  in  manufacturing;  by 
packing  and  handling  the  cotton  in  the  best  manner,  and  by  saving 
and  utilizing  the  seed  or  its  several  products  in  the  most  scientific 
manner,  he  may  get  a  profit  from  his  crop  largely  in  excess  of  that 
ordinarily  realized.  The  demand  is  not  so  much  for  an  increased  pro- 
duction, except  relatively  to  the  area  under  cultivation,  as  for  a  special- 
ization of  cotton  culture  and  improvements  in  the  methods  of  ginning 
and  handling  the  product,  so  that  the  most  esteemed  varieties  may  be 
grown  in  sufficient  quantity  and  at  a  price  that  will  give  the  farmer  a 
higher  percentage  of  profit. 

Wonderful  results  have  been  accomplished  in  the  crossing,  variation, 
and  general  improvement  of  fruits,  flowers,  and  vegetables,  but  the 
great  staples,  like  cotton  and  wheat,  have  been  comparatively  neg- 
lected in  these  respects.  Our  common  cultivated  species  of  cotton 
have  already  been  transformed  by  peculiarities  of  soil  and  climate,  by 
special  methods  of  culture,  and  by  the  use  of  fertilizers  from  a  peren- 
nial to  practically  an  annual  form,  and  by  shortening  the  period  of  its 
growth  the  limits  of  successful  cotton  culture  have  been  greatly  ex- 
tended. But  much  remains  to  be  done  in  improving  the  varieties  of, 
cotton.  No  plant,  however,  is  more  susceptible  to  such  variation  and 
improvement  than  cotton,  and  with  hundreds  of  intelligent  planters 
supplementing  the  work  of  the  experiment  stations,  results  that  will 
be  of  the  greatest  benefit  to  the  industry  can  hardly  fail  to  accrue. 


HISTORY  AND  GENERAL  STATISTICS  OF  COTTON. 

By  E.  B.  Handy, 

Office  of  Experiment  Stations. 

ANCIENT   HISTORY. 

The  dawn  of  history  shows  man  using'  various  fibers  for  the  manu- 
facture of  cloth,  and  the  most  ancient  traditions  of  the  race  prove  that 
the  discovery  of  the  art  of  weaving  was  made  many  centuries  prior  to 
that  time. 

Wool  was  the  principal  material  used  in  Palestine,  Syria,  Greece, 
Italy,  and  Spain;  hemp  in  the  northern  part  of  Europe;  flax  in  Egypt; 
silk  in  China,  and  cotton  in  India;  the  inhabitants  of  each  of  these 
countries  being  well  skilled  in  the  conversion  of  these  raw  fibers  into  the 
cloth  best  suited  to  their  needs. 

The  date  at  which  cotton  fiber  was  first  applied  to  the  weaving  of 
cloth  by  the  Hindoos  is  unknown,  but  in  the  digest  of  ancient  laws 
ascribed  to  Manu,  800  B.  C,  cotton  is  referred  to  so  often  and  in  such  a 
way  as  to  indicate  that  it  must  have  been  known  to  them  for  genera- 
tions, both  as  a  plant  and  as  a  textile. 

The  following  sentence  is  quoted  from  these  laws  as  evidence  of  the 
high  esteem  in  which  the  fiber  was  held :  "  The  sacrificial  thread  of 
the  Brahman. must  be  made  of  cotton  (l-arpasi),  so  as  to  be  put  over  the 
head  in  three  strings;  that  of  the  Cshatnya  of  sana  thread,  that  of  the 
Vaisya  of  woolen  thread." l 

The  following  quotation  from  the  same  source  also  bears  testimony  to 
the  antiquity  of  weaving  and  sizing  among  these  people :  "  Let  a  weaver 
who  has  received  10  palas  of  cotton  thread  give  it  back  increased  to  11 
by  the  rice  water  and  the  like  used  in  weaving;  he  who  does  otherwise 
shall  pay  a  fine  of  12  paiias."2 

Theft  of  cotton  thread  was  made  punishable  by  fines  of  three  times 
the  value  of  the  article  stolen.3 

Herodotus  says:  "There  are  trees  which  grow  wild  there  [India]  the 
fruit  of  which  is  a  wool  exceeding  in  beauty  and  goodness  that  of  sheep. 
The  Indians  make  their  clothes  of  this  tree  wool."4 

His  expression  " aito  $,vkoov  7T€7roi??jn£va,,,:i  referring  to  the  clothing 
of  Xerxes's  army,  is  more  correctly  interpreted  "cotton fiber"  than  the 

'Mann,  Book  II,  No.  44.  'Manu,  Book  VIII,  No.  236. 

2 Manu,  Book  VIII,  No.  397.        "Herod.,  Ill,  106. 
•Herod.,  VII,  65. 
1993— No.  33 2  •        17 


18  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

fiber  of  trees  (bast  fiber).  Moreover,  the  "gvXiva  ifxaria^  of  the 
Indians,  which  is  the  expression  used  by  Gtesias,1  the  contemporary  of 
Herodotus,  may  be  considered  as  referring  to  cotton;  for  Varro,  as 
reported  by  Servius,2  states:  "Ctesias  says  there  are  trees  in  India 
which  bear  wool."  Theophrastus  says:  "The  trees  from  which  the 
Indians  make  cloth  have  a  leaf  like  that  of  the  black  mulberry,  but 
the  whole  plant  resembles  the  dog  rose.  They  set  them  in  plains 
arranged  in  rows  so  as  to  look  like  vines  at  a  distance."3 

Strabo,  who  was  most  careful  and  accurate  in  both  his  investiga- 
tions and  statements,  mentions  the  trees  of  India  on  which  wool  grew, 
and  says:  "The  Indians  use  white  raiment  and  fine  white  cloths  and 
carpasa."4  The  last  word  is  a  form  of  the  Sanskrit  harpasa,  Hebrew 
Jcarpas,  Latin  carbasus,  and  indicates  a  cloth  made  of  either  cotton  or 
flax,  Braudes5  and  Bitter6  maintaining  that  it  was  used  by  classical 
writers  to  denote  cotton. 

Aristobulus,  contemporary  of  Alexander  the  Great,  mentioned  the 
cotton  plant  under  the  name  of  the  wool-bearing  tree,  and  stated  that 
the  capsule  contained  seed  which  were  taken  out,  and  that  the  fiber 
remaining  was  combed  like  wool.7 

Nearchus,  the  admiral  of  Alexander,  who  conducted  a  part  of  his 
army  down  the  Indus,  around  the  shore  of  the  Arabian  and  Persian 
gulfs  to  the  Tigris,  about  327  B.  C,  says:  "There  are  in  India  trees 
bearing,  as  it  were,  bunches  of  wool.  The  natives  made  linen  garments 
of  it,  wearing  a  shirt  which  reached  to  the  middle  of  the  leg,  a  sheet 
folded  about  the  shoulders,  and  a  turban  rolled  round  the  head,  and 
that  the  linen  made  by  them  from  this  substance  was  fine,  and  whiter 
than  any  other."8  The  Greeks  on  this  expedition  made  use  of  an  infer- 
ior kind  of  raw  cotton  to  pad  their  clothing  and  stuff  their  saddles.9 

Pliny1"  writes  of  the  cotton  plant  in  India  with  leaves  similar  to  the 
mulberry  and  resembling  the  dog  rose,  which  was  sowed  in  the  field, 
and  from  which  the  inhabitants  made  linen  clothes.  Here  Pliny  uses 
the  word  Tineas,  but  the  context  shows  that  he  referred  to  cotton.  Quin- 
tus  Curtius  says  of  the  Indians :  "  They  covered  their  bodies  from  head 
to  foot  with  carbasus;  they  bind  shoes  about  their  feet,  linen  cloths 
about  their  heads;"  and,  speaking  of  the  dress  of  the  king,  he  says: 
"The  carbasa  which  he  wore  were  spotted  with  purple  and  gold."11 

fragment  of  Ctesias  (ed.  Muller,  p.  84). 

2 Coram,  in  Virgilii  JEn.,  I,  649. 

3Tkeoph.  Hist.  Plant.,  IV,  4  (p.  132,  ed.  Schneider). 

4Strabo,  XV,  719. 

5Ueber  die  antiken  Namen  nnd  die  geog.  Verbreit.  der  Bannrwolle  im  Alterthum, 
p.  107. 

«Geog.  Vol.  IV,  1,  p.  436. 

7Strabo,  XV,  1  (Vol.  VI,  p.  43,  ed.  Siebenkees). 

8  Arrian.  Ind.,  ch.  16. 

n  Strabo,  XV,  693. 
10Plin.  Hist.  Nat.,  XII,  13. 
»  Luc.,  VIII,  9. 


HISTORY    AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  19 

Lucau,1  the  poet,  who  lived  in  the  first  century  of  the  Christian  era, 
describes  the  inhabitants  of  India  as  those : 

Who  drink  sparkling  juices  from  tender  cane, 
With  dyes  of  crocus  stain  their  hair,  and  fix 
With  colored  gems  the  flowing  carbasus. 

The  Periplus 2  states  that  two  kinds  of  cotton  goods — a  fine  and  a 
coarse  grade — were  sent  from  Ariaca  and  Barygaza  (the  modern  Baroack 
on  the  Nerbudda)  to  Malao,  Mundi,  Mosyllou,  Tabae,  to  Opone  on 
the  east  coast  of  Africa,  and  to  the  islands  lying  off  that  coast.  And  the 
following  places  are  mentioned  in  the  same  book3  as  manufacturing 
centers  for  the  same  cloth :  Palasimnnda,  Masalia  (the  modern  Masuli- 
patam,  on  the  east  coast  of  India),  and  the  country  around  the  mouth 
of  the  Ganges. 

These  references  demonstrate  that  cotton  was  not  only  known  and 
used  by  the  Hindoos  in  early  times,  but  that  they  manufactured  cloth 
from  the  fiber  in  sufficient  quantities  to  supply  their  own  needs  and  to 
export,  or  rather  sell  to  traders,  who  carried  it  to  other  places. 

The  cultivation  of  the  plant  or  the  manufacture  of  the  cloth  from 
the  fiber  did  not  receive  as  much  attention  in  any  country  as  in  India. 
In  fact,  from  1500  B.  0.  until  an  equal  number  of  years  after  the 
beginning  of  the  Christian  era,  India  was  the  center  of  the  cotton 
industry.  The  cotton  cloth  which  the  Indians  produced  from  a  short 
fiber  with  primitive  distaffs  and  rude  looms  was  not  equaled  until  the 
last  half  century.  Some  of  their  muslins  possessed  wonderful  delicacy 
of  texture. 

Two  Arabian  travelers  of  the  middle  ages,  writing  of  India,  say: 
"In  this  country  they  make  garments  of  such  extraordinary  perfection 
that  nowhere  else  are  the  like  to  be  seen.  These  garments  are  for  the 
most  part  round,  and  woven  to  that  degree  of  fineness  that  they  may 
be  drawn  through  a  ring  of  moderate  size."4 

Marco  Polo,5  whose  work  was  first  circulated  about  1298  A.  D.,  men- 
tions the  coast  of  Coromandel  as  producing  "the  finest  and  most  beau- 
tiful cottons  that  are  to  be  found  in  any  part  of  the  world." 

Odoardo  Barbosa,6  one  of  the  Portuguese  who  visited  India  imme- 
diately after  the  discovery  of  the  passage  around  Good  Hope,  speaks 
of  "the  great  quantities  of  cotton  cloths  admirably  painted,  also  some 
white  and  some  striped,  held  in  highest  estimation,"  which  were  made 
in  Bengal;  and  Csesar  Frederick7  mentions  cotton  cloth  so  valuable 
"that  a  small  bale  of  it  will  cost  1,000  or  2,000  duckets." 

1  Luc,  III,  239. 

2  Periplus  maris  Erythrsei,  n  8,  9, 10, 12, 13, 14,  31. 
3Loc.  cit..U  51,61,63. 

4Anciennes  Relations  des  Indes  et  de  la  Chine,  etc.,  p.  21. 

fi  Travels  of  Marco  Polo,  Book  III,  ch.  21,  28. 

6Ramusio's  Raccolta  delle  Navigationi  et  Viaggi,  Tome  I,  p.  315. 

7Hakluyt's  Voyages,  Vol.  II,  p.  366,  ed.  1809 


20  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Tavernier1  says  "some  calicuts  are  made  so  fine  you  can  hardly  feel 
them  in  your  hand,  and  the  thread  when  spun  is  scarce  discernible;" 
also,  that  "the  rich  have  turbans  of  so  fine  a  cloth  that  thirty  ells  of  it 
■put  into  one  turban  make  it  weigh  less  than  four  ounces."  "When  the 
muslin  is  laid  on  the  grass  to  bleach  and  the  dew  has  fallen  upon  it,  it 
is  no  longer  discernible,"  says  Ward;2  and  an  English  review'  of  the 
trade  of  the  latter  part  of  the  seventeenth  century  designated  the 
same  fabrics  as  but  "the  shadow  of  a  commodity."  Surely  the  poetic 
writers  of  the  Orient  w ere  justified  in  calling  them  "webs  of  woven 
wind." 

Cotton  was  introduced  into  China  and  Japan  from  India,  but  com- 
mon use  of  the  fiber  in  these  oriental  countries,  where  at  the  present 
time  it  is  even  more  widely  used  than  in  the  West,  came  as  slowly  as 
the  adoption  of  it  as  clothing  among  Europeans,  and  met  with  equally 
active  opposition.  Although  China  carried  on  an  exchange  of  prod- 
ucts with  India  in  very  early  times,  both  by  way  of  caravans  and  by 
junks  coasting  along  the  shores,  it  was  as  late  as  the  thirteenth  century 
of  the  present  era  before  her  inhabitants  began  the  cultivation  of  cot- 
ton as  anything  but  a  garden  plant.  Marco  Polo,4  although  several 
years  a  resident  of  China,  with  every  facility  for  observation,  gives  no 
account  of  cotton  culture  except  in  the  province  of  Fo-Kien,  but  speaks 
of  silk  as  the  usual  dress  of  the  people.  It  appears,  however,  from 
Chinese  history  that  the  plant  had  been  known  for  many  centuries,  but 
that  its  manufactured  product  was  a  rarity. 

The  introduction  of  cotton  into  China  dates  practically  from  the  con- 
quest of  China  by  the  Tartars,  and  it  was  not  until  1300  A.  D.  or 
thereabouts  that  it  was  cultivated  for  general  use. 

The  cotton  plant  also  thrived  in  ancient  times  in  the  island  of  Tylos, 
situated  near  the  Arabian  coast  in  the  Gulf  of  Persia.  Theophrastus5 
mentions  wool-bearing  trees  which  grew  abundantly  in  this  island,  and 
which  had  leaves  like  those  of  the  vine,  but  smaller.  They  bore  a 
capsule  about  the  size  of  a  quince,  which,  when  ripe,  burst,  disclosing 
the  seed  surrounded  with  a  wool,  which  was  woven  by  the  people  into 
cloth  of  different  qualities.  Pliny fi  makes  similar  statements  regarding 
the  wool-bearing  trees  of  this  island. 

The  climate  and  soil  of  the  island  of  Tylos  were  so  favorable  to  the 
plant  that  cloth  made  of  the  cotton  of  Tylos  was  preferred  to  that  of 
India.7  Although  there  is  no  mention  of  cloth  being  made  in  Tylos,  it 
probably  was  made  there,  and  also  on  the  neighboring  mainland. 

^avernier's  Travels  (Harris's  Collection  of  Voyages,  Vol.  I,  p.  811). 
2View  of  the  History,  Literature,  and  Mythology  of  the  Hindoos,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  127, 
3d  ed. 
3The  Naked  Truth,  p.  11. 
"Travels,  Book  II,  ch.  74. 
5Theoph.  Hist.  Plant.,  IV,  7,  7. 
6Plin.Hist.Nat.,XII,21. 
7  Plin.  loc.  cit.,  XII,  22. 


HISTORY    AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  21 

Because  Pliny  describes  the  Arabian  tree  from  which  the  fiber  was 
secured  to  make  a  cloth  similar  to  linen  as  having-  leaves  like  the 
palm,1  some  have  doubted  the  presence  of  the  true  cotton  plant  in 
Arabia.  But  Theophrastus2  says  Arabia  is  a  producer  of  the  same 
plant,  which  he  had  just  described  as  a  product  of  Tylos;  and  Pliny, 
in  another  connection,3  describing  the  different  kinds  of  cotton  plants, 
intimates  that  besides  the  variety  with  the  palm-like  leaves,  another, 
probably  the  same  plant  described  by  Theophrastus,  also  grew  there. 
The  Peri  plus4  mentions  Omana,  in  the  southern  part  of  Arabia,  as  a 
place  from  which  cotton  cloth  was  shipped,  not  only  to  other  portions 
of  Arabia,  but  even  to  India. 

The  cotton  plant  was  known  on  the  eastern  coast  of  Africa  as  well 
as  in  the  southern  parts  of  Asia.  Although  much  has  been  written  to 
prove  that  the  ancient  Egyptians  used  only  flax  for  weaving  and  knew 
nothing  of  the  cotton  plant,  it  seems  most  probable  that  this  opinion 
is  based  mainly  upon  a  too  narrow  interpretation  of  the  terms  used  by 
classical  authors  and  the  idea  that  both  flax  and  cotton  were  never 
used  by  the  same  people.  The  fact  is  that  both  flax  and  cotton  were 
used,  alone  and  mixed,  by  both  the  Egyptians  and  Indians. 

Egypt  was  one  of  the  most  ancient  as  well  as  most  populous  empires 
of  antiquity,  and  her  inhabitants  were  early  compelled  to  turn  their 
attention  to  other  than  agricultural  occupations;  so  that  the  various 
industries  were  well  known  from  the  date  of  the  earliest  traditions,  and 
among  them  none  were  more  developed  than  weaving.  While  flax  was 
probably  the  most  common  article  used  by  Egyptian  weavers  in  the 
manufacture  of  cloth,  and  linen  was  in  fact  the  material  of  which  the 
clothing  of  the  people  and  the  wrappings  of  their  dead  were  usually 
made,  it  appears  quite  arbitrary  to  state  that  the  Egyptians  knew  noth- 
ing of  cotton,  and  consequently  made  no  use  of  it  in  ancient  times,  for 
the  probability  is  that  it  was  through  the  commercial  and  industrial 
activity  of  this  people  that  cotton  was  brought  to  the  shores  of  the 
Mediterranean  Sea.5 

The  Egyptians  were  adventurous  sailors,  and  had  early  established  a 
trade  from  ports  on  the  Red  Sea  with  those  on  the  western  coast  of 
India.  Doubtless  they  brought  home  many  of  the  fine  fabrics  made 
by  the  skillful  weavers  of  India  from  the  fiber  of  the  cotton  plant.  This 
cotton  plant  also  grew  in  Egypt,  for  Pliny  says:  "In  upper  Egypt, 
toward  Arabia,  there  grows  a  shrub  which  some  call  'gossypion'  and 
others  'xylon,'  from  which  the  stuffs  are  made  which  Ave  call  'xylina.' 
It  is  small  and  bears  a  fruit  resembling  the  filbert,  within  which  is  a 
downy  wool  which  is  spun  into  thread.  ^Nothing  is  more  to  be  desired 
than  this  goods  for  whiteness  and  softness.  Garments  are  made  from  it 
which  are  very  acceptable  to  the  priests  of  Egypt."0    And  Pollux,  who 

1  Plin.  Hist.  Nat.,  XII,  22.  ^ Periplus,  vS  36. 

JTheoph.  Hist.  Plant.,  IV,  7,  8.  HBrandes,  loc.  cit.,  p.  111. 

■spiiu.  Hist.  Nat.,  XIX,  3.  6Plin.  Joe.  cit.,  XIX,  3. 


22  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

lived  about  150  A.  D.,  reports  that  "  among  the  Indians,  and  now  also 
among  the  Egyptians,  a  sort  of  wool  is  obtained  from  a  tree.  The  cloth 
made  from  this  wool  may  be  compared  to  linen,  except  that  it  is  thicker 
The  tree  produces  a  fruit  most  nearly  resembling  a  walnut,  but  three- 
cleft.  After  the  outer  covering  has  divided  and  become  dry  the  sub- 
stance resembling  wool  is  extracted  and  is  used  in  the  manufacturing 
of  cloth  for  weft,  the  warp  being  of  linen."1 

These  two  passages  taken  together  are  worthy  of  consideration,  and 
no  mere  dispute  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  terms  used  by  other  writers 
can  throw  discredit  on  such  distinct  statements.  The  description  Pol- 
lux gives  of  the  cotton  tree  is  remarkably  correct — more  so  than  any 
given  before  his  time,  unless  it  be  that  of  Aristobulus  and  Nearchus,  the 
companions  of  Alexander  the  Great.  The  description  of  the  pericarp  as 
three-cleft  and  the  comparison  of  the  boll  to  a  walnut  are  in  striking 
agreement  with  the  facts.  Besides,  he  goes  into  details  as  to  the  use 
of  the  thread  for  the  weft  only,  while  use  of  linen  thread  for  warp  is 
stated. 

Although  Herodotus  states,  in  referring  to  the  Egyptian  priests, 
that  they  wore  linen  clothes,2  Pliny,  as  above  quoted,  says  that  cotton 
clothes  were  very  acceptable  to  them,  and  Philostratus 3  confirms  his 
statement.  Just  here  it  may  be  well  to  remark  that  the  word  translated 
"linen"  did  not  always  refer  to  the  fiber  of  which  a  material  was  made, 
but  often  to  the  general  appearance  of  the  cloth  ;4  therefore  cloth  made 
of  either  flax  or  cotton  alone  or  mixed  is  called  linen ;  so  that  the 
direct  statements  of  these  authors  are  not  necessarily  contradictory. 
Moreover,  the  use  of  cotton,  a  vegetable  fiber,  in  the  garment  of  the 
priests  would  be  considered  equally  as  pure  as  that  of  linen,  because  it 
would  not  be  in  conflict  with  the  religious  rules  which  proscribed  wool, 
an  animal  product. 

The  fact  that  all  mummy  cloths,  so  far  as  yet  examined,  have  been 
found  to  consist  of  flax  has  been  used  as  a  basis  for  an  argument  to 
prove  that  cotton  was  not  used  by  the  Egyptians;  but  it  seems  far  from 
conclusive,  as  for  religious  reasons  flax  alone  may  have  been  used  for 
that  purpose,  while  cotton,  wool,  and  silk  may  have  been  regularly  used 
by  the  living  for  clothing  or  ornament.  Elsewhere  it  is  even  stated 
that  the  form  and  manner  of  wearing  these  clothes  was  like  a  shawl  or 
mantle,5  and  that  the  Egyptian  cotton  cloth  was  thicker  than  that 
made  of  linen  and  was  embroidered.6 

In  reference  to  the  lands  on  the  west  coast  of  Asia,  there  are  so  many 
traces  of  the  use  of  cotton,  especially  by  the  Semitic  tribes  of  antiquity, 

1  Polluc.  Onomast.,  VII,  75. 

"  Herod.,  II,  37. 

3Philostr.  Vit.  Apollon.,  II,  9. 

4Muller,  Handbucli  <ler  klas.  Alterth.  Wissensch.,  Vol.  IV,  p.  925,  note  2. 

5  Clem.  Alex.,  Paedag.,  II,  10;  and  Polluc.  Onomast.,  VII,  72. 

6  Polluc.  Onomast.,  VII,  75. 


HISTORY   AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  23 

that  the  suggestion  arises  that  perhaps  this  country  was  a  habitat  of  the 
plant,  as  America  is  known  to  have  been. 

The  vegetable  fiber  which  Josephus 1  calls  x£S^v,  the  Hebrew  ketonet, 
modern  Arabic  kutn  (a  sound  which  appears  also  in  Phoenician,  Syrian, 
and  Ohaldee),  was  without  doubt  the  product  of  the  herbaceous  cotton 
plant  which  to  this  day  grows  in  the  coast  lauds  of  western  Asia,  where 
in  many  places  it  is  carefully  cultivated.2 

The  country  around  Jericho  was  especially  noted  for  this  product; 
aud  Hierapolis,  in  Syria,  was  formerly  known  as  Magog,3  which  word, 
according  to  the  opinion  of  modern  scholars,4  would  be  more  properly 
spelled  Mabog  (cotton  town).  It  was  also  known  as  Bambyce,  a  word 
which  clearly  refers  to  cotton.5 

The  manufacture  of  cotton  goods  known  as  othonion  is  credited  to 
Cilicia  and  Palestine,  in  Asia  Minor,  by  very  careful  and  painstaking 
authors,6  aud  Movers  states  that  the  inhabitants  of  that  country  prior 
to  the  Hebrews,  1500  B.  0.,  made  use  of  cotton,  and  mentions  the 
trade  of  the  Phoenicians  with  the  rich  tribes  of  southern  Arabia,  stat- 
ing that  they  furnished  them  large  quantities  of  cotton  goods.7 

Claudianus8  throws  some  light  on  the  industries  and  trade  of  the 
Hebrews  when  he  says  that  the  bright-colored  cloths  which  the  Indians 
valued  so  highly  were  obtained  from  these  people,  though  perhaps  he 
erred,  substituting  them  for  their  kindred,  the  Phoenicians,  whose 
trade  was  widespread  and  whose  manufactures  were  famous.  It  must 
be  remembered  that  othonion9  was  generally,  although  not  invariably, 
made  of  cotton. 

From  very  early  time  the  Greeks  vied  with  the  Phoenicians  and  the 
Egyptians  in  artistic  spinning  and  weaving,  and  as  early  as  1200 B.C. 
had  reached  a  stage  of  advancement  in  those  arts  which  has  been  sur- 
passed only  by  the  most  skillful  manufacturers  during  the  present  cen- 
tury. Although,  as  has  been  stated  at  the  opening  of  this  chapter,  the 
material  used  was  generally  wool,  linen  soon  became  common,  and 
cotton  was  introduced  at  a  later  period. 

The  Greeks  must  have  known  of  cotton  aud  some  kind  of  cloth  made 
from  it  soon  after  the  expedition  of  Alexander,  for  his  invasion  of  India 
brought  him  and  the  men  of  his  army  in  direct  contact  with  a  popula- 
tion which  used  it  almost  exclusively  for  clothing,  bedding,  curtains, 
housing  for  their  war  elephants,  etc. 

The  earliest  instance  of  the  use  of  the  oriental  name  for  the  plant  in 

'Joseph.,  Ant.  Jud  ,  III,  7,  2. 

2Brandes,  loc.  tit.,  p.  111. 

3Plin.  loc.  cit.,  V,  23,  19. 

4Forbiger,  Alte.  Geog.,  Bd.  II,  pp.  85,  643. 

6Brandes,  loc.  cit.,  p.  103. 

6 Clem.  Alex.,  Paedag.,  II,  10. 

7Movers,  Phonik.,  Bd.  II,  3,  p.  259. 

8Eutrop.,  I,  357. 

yMUller,  loc.  tit.,  Vol.  IV,  p.  925,  note  4. 


24  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

any  classical  author  is  the  line  of  Statins  Oaeoilius,  who  died  1G9  B.C., 
which  is  quoted  by  Mouius  Marcellus1  from  the  Pausimachus  of  Statius, 
and  reads:  "  Garbasina,  molochina,  Angelina."  As  these  words  are 
Greek  and  the  play  from  which  the  verse  is  taken  has  a  Greek  name,  it 
was  probably  taken  from  an  earlier  Greek  writer,  and  would  indicate 
that  the  cloth  carbasina2  was  known  to  the  Greeks  at  least  200  B.  0., 
although  it  is  not  necessarily  true  that  they  either  used  it  extensively 
or  engaged  in  its  manufacture. 

The  cotton  plant  also  grew  in  Elis,  in  Achaia,3  and  the  town  of  Patrre 
was  the  center  of  the  manufacture  of  material  from  that  liber.  Pausa- 
nius4  unequivocally  describes  byssus  the  plant  grown  there  as  cotton, 
and  says  that  the  byssus  of  Elis  was  not  inferior  to  that  of  the  Hebrews, 
and  that  the  women  of  Patrte  gained  their  living  by  weaving  cloth  and 
headdresses  of  the  byssus  grown  in  Elis.5 

There  is  no  record  of  the  cotton  plant  being  cultivated  in  Italy  prior 
to  the  Christian  era,  nor  in  fact  for  many  centuries  later,  but  a  knowl- 
edge of  the  use  of  its  fiber,  either  raw,  for  the  manufacture  of  cloth, 
or  already  woven  for  clothing,  must  have  been  widespread  among  the 
Eomans  prior  to  the  opening  of  that  era. 

Elis  (Achaia),  Syria,  Cilicia,  Palestine,  and  Egypt  were  acquired  by 
Roman  arms  from  150  to  30  B.  C,  and  it  has  been  shown  above  that 
all  of  these  countries  produced  the  cotton  plant  and  their  inhabitants 
spun  and  wove  its  fiber  into  a  cloth,  which  must  have  attracted  the 
attention  of  their  Roman  conquerors  because  of  its  superiority  to  the 
products  of  their  home  manufacture.  Fine  and  tasteful  cloth  must 
have  been  sent  from  Greece,  Syria,  and  Egypt  to  Rome,  and,  in  fact, 
among  the  imported  articles  upon  which  a  tax  (tariff)  was  laid  cotton 
is  mentioned.6 

In  the  list  of  dutiable  articles  given  iu  the  Digest  of  Justinian7 
occur  opus  byssinum,  carbasum,  and  carbasea.  Carbasum,  according  to 
Brandes,G  is  cotton  cloth,  carbasea  cotton  yarn,  opus  byssinum  other 
and  various  articles  made  of  cotton  fiber,  as  the  hair  nets  of  Patrse. 

Dirksen8  says  that  opus  byssinum  can  only  mean  fine  cotton  cloth, 
i.  e.,  Indian  muslin,  which,  under  the  Roman  Emperors,  was  much 
sought  after  for  the  dresses  of  the  coquettish  dames  of  that  luxurious 
time;  and  that  carbasea  is  probably  othonium,  which  latter,  Arrian9 
says,  was  made  from  carbasum  (a  word  derived  from  the  Indian  word 

'Libr.,  XVI. 

2  This  was  imported  from  India.     Periplus,  §§  6, 14,  48,  57. 

»Plin.  Hist.  Nat.,  XIX,  1,4;  and  Curtius  Pelop.,Vol.  II,  p.  10. 

<  Pans.,  V,5,2;  VI,  26,4;  VII,  21, 14. 

5Brandes,  Joe.  cit.,  p.  117. 

6Brandes,  Joe.  cit.,  p.  118. 

^  Dig.,  XXXIX,  tet.  4,  16,  §  7. 

8H.  E.  Dirksen,  Abhandlung  der  Berlin  Akademie  der  Wissenschaft,  1843,  p.  94. 

9Periplns  mar.  Erythr.,  §  24. 


HISTORY   AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  25 

carpas),  and  that  that  product  of  the  weaver's  skill  in  central  India 
was  the  object  of  an  active  trade  with  inhabitants  of  Koine.1 

Miiller,2  iu  describing  the  clothes  and  personal  ornaments  used  by 
the  Romans  in  the  latter  part  of  the  Republic,  says:  "Hand  in  hand 
with  the  change  of  customs,  there  were  many  changes  in  their  clothes 
in  staff,  color,  manner  of  wearing,  and  in  cut."  And,  after  enumerat- 
ing these  changes,  he  says:  "  Besides  these,  they  use  carbasus  or  carpa- 
sus — cotton  or  shirting — that  is  a  fine,  thick  woven  stuff,  made  sometimes 
of  linen,  sometimes  of  cotton."3 

Mailer  also  mentions  cotton  cloth  as  being  used  for  clothing  by  the 
Romans  in  the  period  just  preceding  the  Diocletian  era,  or  prior  to 
284  A.  D. 

The  oriental  custom  of  using  cotton  as  a  protection  from  the  sun 
was  followed  by  the  Romans,  for  Verres,  when  praetor  in  Sicily  (70 
B.  C),  used  tents  with  coverings  of  cotton,  and  P.  Lentulus  Spinther, 
in  the  year  63  B.  C,  covered  the  theater  with  cotton  awnings  at  the 
Apollinarian  games,4  to  which  fact  Lucretius5  apparently  refers  when 
he  compares  Jie  clouds  spread  over  the  sky  to  the  awnings  of  carbasus 
which  veiled  the  spectators  from  the  sun's  rays  during  the  games. 
Although  known  and  used  by  the  Romans,  it  is  probable  that  the 
material  made  from  cotton  fiber  was  too  expensive  because  of  the  cost 
of  transportation  to  compete  with  the  home  manufactures  of  wool  or 
flax,  and  that  cotton  was  not  in  general  use  among  the  people.  It  must 
also  be  remembered  that  many  of  the  articles  of  clothing  which  at 
the  present  time  are  made  of  cotton  cloth  were  not  worn  at  all  by  the 
people  of  antiquity,  and  that,  therefore,  this  material  was  not  as  well 
adapted  to  their  need  as  to  ours.  Nor  must  it  be  supposed  that  cotton 
goods  at  any  time  wholly  supplanted  linen  fabrics,  even  in  the  East. 
Linen  was  widely  used  not  only  in  Egypt  and  the  countries  on  the  bor- 
der of  the  Mediterranean,  but  also  in  Arabia  and  Persia,  as  is  shown 
by  the  works  of  eastern  travelers  and  investigators.6 

The  culture  of  the  cotton  plant  and  the  manufacture  of  its  fiber 
were  spread  by  the  Mohammedans  at  the  periods  of  their  conquests 
into  every  part  of  the  continent  of  Africa  north  of  the  equator,  and 
also  to  them  must  be  attributed  the  real  introduction  into  Europe  of 
the  cultivation  and  manufacture  of  cotton.       Z- — - 

Abu  Zacaria  Ebn  el  A  warn,7  who  wrote  in  the  twelfth  century,  gives 
a  full  account  of  the  mode  of  culture  proper  for  the  cotton  plant,  and 

'Ritter,  Geog.,  Bd.  IV,  1,  p.  346. 

-Miiller,  loc.  cit.,  p.  873. 

3Ibid.,  p.  874. 

<Plin.  loo.  cit.,  XIX,  3,  6. 

5Lucretius,  VI,  108. 

6Thevenot's  Travels  in  Harris's  Collection,  Vol.  II,  pp.  824,  895;  Bnrkhardt's  in 
Arabia,  pp.  183,  184;  Hamilton's  Remarks  on  Turkey  and  Egypt,  pp.  388,427;  Buck- 
ingham's Travels  in  Mesopotamia,  Vol.  I,  pp.  145,  294,  302;  Vol.  II,  pp.  29,37. 

7Libro  de  Agricultura  (trans,  by  J.  A.  Banqueri),  Vol.  II,  ch.  22,  p.  103. 


26  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

» 

also  states  that  the  plant  was  cultivated  in  Sicily,  which  island  had 
been  in  possession  of  the  Saracens  from  the  ninth  to  the  eleventh 
century. 

In  the  reign  of  Abderahinan  III,  who  was  ruler  in  Cordova  from  912 
to  961  A.  D.,  many  of  the  natural  products  and  arts  of  the  East  were 
introduced,  and  the  cotton  plant,  sugar  cane,  rice,  and  the  silkworm 
were  naturalized  in  Spain.  The  cotton  plant  was  chiefly  cultivated  at 
Oliva  and  Candia.1  De  Maries2  says:  "  It  was  the  Moors  who  brought 
into  Spain  the  cultivation  of  rice  and  cotton,  of  the  mulberry  tree,  aud 
the  sugar  cane." 

Columbus3  found  cotton  growing  abundantly  in  the  West  Indies  in 
1492.  He  and  other  explorers  found  it  equally  abundant  upon  the  main- 
land of  the  new  world,  and  found  the  inhabitants  of  those  countries 
using  its  fiber  for  the  weaving  of  cloth  and  showing  considerable  skill 
in  its  manipulation. 

Cortez4  found  cotton  in  Mexico  in  1519;  he  gathered  it  and  used  the 
wool  to  stuff  the  jackets  of  his  soldiers  to  enable  them  to  resist  the 
arrows  of  the  natives. 

Cotton  was  the  chief  article  of  clothing  among  the  Mexicans,  as  they 
had  neither  wool  nor  silk,  and  did  not  use  fiax,5  although  they  possessed 
that  plant.  They  made  large  webs  from  cotton  fiber  spun  into  yarn,  as 
delicate  and  as  fine  as  those  made  in  Holland  at  that  date.  Their 
warriors  wore  cuirasses  of  cotton  covering  the  body  from  neck  to  waist.6 

Cotton  fabrics  made  into  mantles,  waistcoats,  handkerchiefs,  coun- 
terpanes, and  tapestries  formed  part  of  the  presents  sent  by  Cortez  to 
Charles  V  of  Spain.7 

Pizarro  found  cotton  in  Peru  in  1522,  and  it  has  been  discovered  in 
the  ancient  tombs  of  that  country.  The  writer  of  this  paper  has  seen 
a  cotton  blanket  taken  from  around  a  Peruvian  mummy.  The  fibers,  to 
which  some  of  the  seed  were  still  clinging,  were  loosely  spun  into  thick 
yarn  and  were  in  a  good  state  of  preservation. 

Magellan8  saw  cotton  among  the  Brazilians,  who  used  a  thread  formed 
of  its  fiber  to  make  fishing  nets,  clothing,  and  hammocks. 

In  a  word,  everywhere  between  the  parallels  of  40°  north  and  40° 
south  latitude,  with  the  exception  of  the  extensive  region  of  the  United 
States  now  known  as  the  cotton  belt,  cotton,  either  in  its  wild  or  culti- 
vated state,  was  known  and  used  at  the  dateof  the  settlementof  America. 

The  history  of  the  introduction  and  spread  of  cotton  culture  in  the 

1  History  of  Mohammedan  Empire  in  Spain,  Shakespeare  and  Home,  p.  263. 
2Histoire  de  la  Domination  des  Arabes  et  des  Maures  en  Espagne,  etc.,  translated  by 
Joseph  Conde,  Tome  I,  pp.  468,  469. 

3  Ramusio's  Collection,  Tome  II,  pp.  2,  4,  16,  50. 

4  Clavigero,  Histoire  Mexique,  Tome  VII,  §  58. 
8  Clavigero,  loc.  cit.,  Tome  I,  §  7. 

6  Humboldt,  Researches,  Vol.  I,  p.  202. 

7  Clavigero,  loc.  cit.,  Tome  VII,  §§  57,  66. 
"Ramusio's  Collection,  Tome  I,  p.  353. 


HISTORY   AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  27 

United  States  is  so  closely  connected  with  tlie  changes  in  the  methods 
of  manufacturing  cotton  cloth  in  Europe  that  it  is  first  necessary  to 
consider,  at  least  briefly,  the  development  of  those  inventions  which 
created  such  an  unprecedented  revolution  in  the  textile  arts. 

EARLY   COTTON  MANUFACTURE   IN  EUROPE. 

As  we  have  seen,  knowledge  of  the  cotton  plant  and  of  the  use  of  its 
fiber  was  many  centuries  making  its  way  from  India  to  the  southern 
borders  of  Europe,  and  it  appears  to  have  taken  as  many  more  to 
introduce  the  culture  of  the  plant  and  the  manufacture  of  cotton  cloth 
into  that  country. 

Neither  the  Eomans  nor  their  successors  engaged  in  the  cultivation  of 
cotton  or  the  manufacture  of  muslins.  Descriptions  of  the  production 
and  manufacture  of  silk,  linen,  and  wool  in  Sicily,  Italy,  France,  and 
southern  Europe  generally  are  to  be  found  in  the  writings  of  mediaeval 
authors,  but  not  of  cotton.  Spain  at  the  western  and  Turkey  at  the 
eastern  extremity  of  the  Mediterranean  Sea  were  the  first  to  engage 
in  this  industry,  and  there  it  was  introduced  by  the  Mohammedan 
conquerors. 

Baines,1  writing  of  the  introduction  of  cotton  into  eastern  Europe, 
says: 

I  have  not  been  able  to  ascertain  at  what  time  cotton  began  to  be  manufactured 
in  Turkey  in  Europe ;  but  tbere  seems  no  reason  to  think  that  it  was  before  the 
conquests  of  the  Turks  in  Roninania,  in  the  fourteenth  century;  nor  could  it  have 
been  much  after,  as  the  victorious  settlers  would  naturally  bring  with  them  their 
own  arts,  and  the  use  of  cotton  garments  was  then  common  in  Asia  Minor.  The 
cotton  plant  found  a  congenial  soil  and  climate  in  Roumania  and  Macedonia,  where 
it  is  now  (1835)  cultivated  to  a  great  extent,  and  the  spinning  and  weaving  of  the 
wool  forms  one  of  the  most  important  branches  of  industry  in  that  country. 

A  passage  in  Historia  Critica  de  Espana,2  though  somewhat  ambig- 
uous, would  imply  that  the  manufacture  of  linen,  silk,  and  cotton 
existed  in  Spain  in  the  ninth  century;  and  De  Maries  states  that 
the  cotton  manufacture  was  introduced  into  Spain  during  the  reign 
of  Abderahman  III,  in  the  tenth  century,  by  the  Moors,  who  excelled 
in  tlie  arts  of  tanning  and  preparing  leather,  of  weaving  cotton,  linen, 
and  hemp,  and  in  the  manufacture  of  silk  stuffs.  In  the  fourteenth 
century  Granada  was  noted  for  its  manufacture  of  cotton,  and  Ebn 
Alkhatib  states  in  a  history  of  the  country: 

Here  you  find  also  the  coccus  with  which  the  cotton  stuffs  are  dyed,  for  there  was 
a  great  abundance  of  cotton  as  well  for  commerce  as  for  use  in  manufacture,  and  the 
cotton  garments  made  here  are  said  to  be  superior  to  those  of  Assyria  in  softness, 
delicacy,  and  beauty.3 

The  arts  and  civilization  of  Mohammedan  Spain,  however,  did  not 
spread  rapidly  into  Christian  Europe.     Extensive  as  was  the  commerce 

1  History  of  the  Cotton  Manufacture,  p.  46. 

2Masdeu,  Historia  Critica  de  Espana,  Vol.  XIII,  p.  131. 

3Casiri:  Bibliotheca  Aribico-Hispana  Escurialensis,  Vol.  II,  p.  248. 


28  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

carried  on  by  the  Mohammedans,  it  was  nearly  all  eastward  with  Africa 
and  India.  Even  the  Spanish  Christians  learned  but  little  from  the 
invaders  of  their  country,  with  whom  they  waged  an  incessant  contest 
for  eight  centuries,  and  the  manufacture  of  cotton  was  confined  to  the 
southern  borders  of  Europe  until  the  sixteenth  century.  The  historian1 
of  the  commerce  of  Barcelona  says: 

One  of  the  most  famous  and  useful  of  the  industries  of  that  city  was  the  manufac- 
ture of  cotton  ;  its  workers  were  united  in  a  guild  in  the  thirteenth  century,  and  the 
names  of  two  of  its  streets  have  preserved  the  memory  of  the  ancient  locality  of 
their  shops. 

He  also  says  the  trade  was  known  by  the  name  of  "  fustian  man- 
ufactures" (fustaneros,  i.  e.,  weavers  of  cotton  goods),  and  was  so 
ancient  that  in  the  year  1255  the  exercise  of  the  trade  was  confined  to 
the  extremities  and  suburbs  of  the  city  because  of  the  annoyance  the 
shops  caused  others  in  their  vicinity.  This  name  "fustian"  comes  from 
fuste,  which  means  substance,  and  is  so  called  because  it  gives  sub- 
stance to  the  thinner  cloth  or  silk  garments  in  which  it  was  used  as  a 
lining.2 

In  the  absence  of  dates,  it  is  difficult  to  judge  of  the  correctness  of 
the  claim  that  fustians  were  first  made  in  Flanders,  but  it  is  possible 
that  the  Flemings  may  have  acquired  the  art  of  the  manufacture  of 
cotton  from  the  Turks  during  the  Crusades,  as  they  did  many  other  arts. 
This  does  not  invalidate  tlie  Spanish  claim  as  to  the  origin  of  the 
manufacture  in  Barcelona,  as  the  trade  name  was  applied  to  the  new 
Flemish  stuffs. 

The  earliest  discovered  date  at  which  cotton  manufacture  existed  in 
Italy  was  in  the  beginning  of  the  fourteenth  century,  at  which  time  a 
historian  of  Venice  dates  its  introduction  to  that  city.  Venetian  fus- 
tians were  among  the  articles  enumerated  as  traded  in  by  the  English 
Society  of  Merchants  and  Adventurers  in  1615.3  Among  the  imports 
to  Antwerp  in  1560  fustian  and  dimities  of  many  fine  sorts  from  Milan 
are  mentioned.  Antwerp  also  imported,  about  this  time,  fustians,  linen, 
tapestry,  etc.,  and  exported  to  England  cottons  and  cotton  wool,  the 
latter  of  which  the  merchants  of  Antwerp  are  said  to  have  procured  from 
Portugal.  There  is  also  a  list  of  foreign  goods  imported  by  the  English 
Society  of  Merchants  and  Adventurers  in  1601  from  Holland  and  Ger- 
many in  which  fustian,  said  to  have  been  manufactured  in  Nuremburg,4 
appears. 

When  cotton  manufacture  was  introduced  into  England  is  not  definitely 
settled.  There  is  no  mention  of  the  manufacture  or  use  of  cotton  in  the 
celebrated  poor  law  of  Elizabeth  (1001),  though  hemp,  flax,  and  wool  are 
expressly  named.     The  first  authentic  record  is  in  Boberts's  Treasure  of 

1  Capmany,  Tome  I,  Part  III, p.  50. 

2  Diccionario  de  la  Real  Acad.  Espana. 

3  Bailies,  loc.  cit.,  p.  45. 

4  A  treatise  of  commerce,  1601,  p.  23,  mentioned  by  Baines. 


HISTORY    AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  29 

Traffic,  published  in  1641;  but  it  is  possible,  and  even  probable,  that 
the  art  was  imported  from  Flanders  by  the  artisans  who  fled  from  that 
country  to  England  in  the  latter  part  of  the  sixteenth  century,  as  it  is 
probable  that  the  manufacture  had  established  itself  more  or  less  firmly 
before  it  attracted  the  attention  of  the  author  of  the  above-named  pam- 
phlet. We  may  presume,  then,  that  it  was  well  established  in  England 
by  1611,  but  after  that  date  the  spread  was  not  rapid.  The  crudeness  of 
the  machinery  for  spinning  was  such  that  fine  yarn  could  not  be  made. 
Both  spinning  and  weaving  were  done  by  individuals  and  families  in 
their  own  houses  on  clumsy  and  heavy  machines.  These  implements 
were  but  little  better  than  those  in  use  two  thousand  years  before. 
The  distaff,  the  earliest  of  spinning  machines,  was  still  in  use,  and  the 
best  to  be  had  was  the  one- thread  spinning  wheel.  The  loom  used  was 
scarcely  an  improvement  on  that  which  the  East  Indian  had  used 
centuries  before,  though  it  was  constructed  with  greater  firmness 
and  compactness.  Owing  to  imperfections  in  their  machines,  it  was 
impossible  for  the  Europeans  to  make  cotton  yarn  combining  strength 
and  firmness.  The  yarn  when  spun  was  loose  and  flimsy;  to  make  it 
strong  it  had  to  be  heavy. 

The  finished  web  had  often  to  be  carried  a  long  distance  to  market. 
It  was  only  in  1760  that  Manchester  merchants  began  to  furnish  the 
weavers  in  the  neighboring  villages  with  linen  yarn  and  raw  cotton  and 
to  pay  a  fixed  price  for  the  perfected  web,  thus  relieving  the  weavers  of 
the  necessity  of  providing  themselves  with  material  and  seeking  a  mar- 
ket for  their  cloth,  and  enabling  them  to  prosecute  their  employment 
with  greater  regularity.1 

It  was  also  about  that  time  that  England  began  to  export  her  cotton 
goods,  for  until  then  her  weavers  had  not  been  able  to  do  more  than 
supply  the  home  demand.  This  foreign  trade  at  once  increased  the 
demand  for  cotton  goods,  and  the  increased  demand  presented  a  prob- 
lem which  the  manufacturers  at  first  found  difficult  of  solution.  The 
procuring  of  supplies  of  linen  yarn  needed  for  the  warp  of  these  textiles 
was  not  difficult,  but  where  was  the  cotton  yarn  to  come  from  ?  The 
spinners  were  producing  already  as  much  as  their  rude  machines  would 
permit,  and  additional  spinners  were  not  to  be  had.  The  demand  for 
cotton  thread  exceeded  the  supply;  the  price  of  yarn  rose  with  the 
demands  of  trade  and  the  extension  of  the  manufacture  and  operated 
as  a  check  to  the  further  increase  of  the  exports.  The  trade  had 
reached  the  poiut  where  hand  carders,  single-thread  spinning  wheels, 
and  the  hand  loom,  requiring  a  man  to  each  machine,  were  clearly 
inadequate  to  the  service,  and  the  cotton  trade  of  Great  Britain  in  the 
middle  of  the  eighteenth  century  seemed  to  have  reached  its  limit. 
About  this  time  Hargreaves,  Arkwright,  Crompton,  Cartwright,  and 
Watt,  men  either  directly  or  indirectly  engaged  in  and  familiar  with 
the  needs  of  the  cotton  manufacture,  invented  machines  which  raised 


Baines,  loc.  cit.,  p.  115. 


30  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

the  trade  from  an  experimental,  or  at  least  a  struggling,  industry  into 
the  most  important  manufacture  of  the  world.  The  carding  engine,  the 
spinning  jenny,  the  spinning  frame,  the  stocking  frame,  the  power  loom, 
and  the  adaptation  of  the  steam  engine  to  the  propulsion  of  these 
machines  at  once  supplied  the  means  of  producing  an  immense  amount 
of  yarn  and  cloth.  These  inventions,  it  is  true,  were  not  in  themselves 
perfect,  but  the  principles  on  which  they  were  built  are  those  on  which 
the  most  complicated  textile  machines  of  this  day  are  based. 

The  supply  of  raw  material  to  meet  the  demands  of  the  trade  was 
limited.  The  West  Indies,  the  Levant,  and  India  were  the  countries 
from  which  this  supply  was  drawn,  but  they  were  unable  to  furnish 
enough  raw  cotton  to  keep  the  new  machines  in  operation,  and  it  was 
necessary  to  look  elsewhere. 

America  was  the  only  hope  of  the  cotton  manufacturer ;  but  as  at 
that  time  the  United  States  produced  little  or  no  cotton,  for  a  few  years 
all  the  increased  supply  came  from  Brazil. 

COTTON  IN   THE   UNITED    STATES. 

As  Great  Britain  was  the  last  of  the  European  countries  to  take  up 
cotton  manufacture,  and  has  carried  it  to  its  fullest  development,  so 
the  United  States  was  the  last  to  enter  the  list  of  cotton-producing 
countries,  and  has  been  for  nearly  a  hundred  years  the  foremost  of 
them  all.  The  powerful  influence  that  the  production  of  cotton  has 
had  upon  the  commerce,  industrial  development,  and  civil  institu- 
tions of  the  United  States  can  scarcely  be  realized  by  one  unfamiliar 
with  the  subject. 

It  is  doubtful  whether  cotton  is  indigenous  to  any  part  of  this  coun- 
try, and  we  have  no  authentic  record  of  the  precise  time  of  its  intro- 
duction. Cotton  seed  was  brought  in  from  all  quarters  of  the  globe, 
and  the  American  plant,  the  result  of  innumerable  crossings,  remains, 
as  to  its  origin,  a  puzzle  to  botanists. 

The  beginning  of  the  culture  of  cotton  in  the  United  States  occurred 
about  one  hundred  and  seventy-five  years  before  the  industry  became 
at  all  important.  The  first  effort  to  produce  cotton  on  the  North  Ameri- 
can continent  was  probably  made  at  Jamestown  the  year  of  the  arri- 
val of  the  colonists. '  In  a  pamphlet  entitled  Nova  Britannica ;  Offering 
Most  Excellent  Fruits  of  Planting  in  Virginia,  published  in  London 
in  1609,  it  is  stated  that  cotton  would  grow  as  well  in  that  province 
as  in  Italy.  In  another  pamphlet,  called  A  Declaration  of  the  State 
of  Virginia,  published  in  London  in  1620,  the  author  mentions  cotton, 
wool,  and  sugar  cane  among  the  "naturall  commodities  dispersed  up 
and  downe  the  divers  parts  of  the  world,  *  *  *  all  of  which  may 
also  be  had  in  abundance  in  Virginia." 

1  Description  of  the  New  Discovered  Country,  British  State  Papers,  Colonial, 
Vol.  I,  15,  I;  Economic  History  of  Virginia  in  the  Seventeenth  Century,  Bruce, 
Vol.  I,  p.  194. 


HISTORY   AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  31 

According  to  Bancroft,1  the  first  experiment  in  cotton  culture  in  the 
colonies  was  made  in  Virginia  during  Wyatt's  administration  of  the 
government.     Writing  of  that  period,  he  says: 

The  first  culture  of  cotton  iu  the  United  States  deserves  commemoration.  In  this 
year  (1621)  the  seeds  were  planted  as  an  experiment,  and  their  ''plentiful  coining  up" 
was  at  that  early  day  a  subject  of  interest  in  America  and  England. 

Cotton  wool  was  listed  in  that  year  at  8d.  a  pound,  which  shows  that 
it  may  have  been  grown  earlier,  for  it  is  scarcely  possible  that  it  could 
have  been  grown,  cleaned,  and  received  in  market  in  the  same  year. 

Seabrook2  states  that  the  green-seed,  or  upland,  variety  was  certainly 
grown  in  Virginia  to  a  limited  extent  at  least  one  hundred  and  thirty 
years  before  the  Eevolution.  Some  of  the  early  governors  of  that  col- 
ony were  especially  energetic  in  their  efforts  to  encourage  its  cultivation. 
Among  these  were  Sir  William  Berkeley,  Francis  Morrison,  his  deputy, 
and  Sir  Edmund  Andros.  The  latter,  says  one  authority,3  "gave  par- 
ticular marks  of  his  favor  toward  the  propagation  of  cotton,  which  since 
his  time  has  been  much  neglected." 

The  exports  of  the  Virginia  colony  during  the  first  thirty  years  of  its 
existence  were  confined  almost  exclusively  to  tobacco,  but  there  is  evi- 
dence that  in  the  latter  half  of  the  seventeenth  century  cotton  was  cul- 
tivated and  manufactured  among  the  planters  for  domestic  consumption. 
Burk4  states  that  "after  the  Kestoration  [1G60]  their  attention  was 
strongly  attracted  to  home  manufactures  as  well  by  the  necessities  of 
their  position  as  by  the  encouragement  of  the  assembly  and  the  bounty 
offered  by  the  King.  But  the  zeal  displayed  in  the  outset  for  these  prod- 
ucts gradually  cooled,  and  if  we  except  the  manufacture  of  coarse  cloths 
and  unpainted  cotton,  *  *  *  nothing  remained  of  the  sounding  list 
prepared  with  so  much  labor  by  the  King  and  recommended  by  legisla- 
tion, premium,  and  royal  bounty." 

Among  the  earliest  historical  references  to  cotton  in  this  country  is 
that  contained  in  "A  brief  description  of  the  Province  of  Carolina,  on 
the  coasts  of  Florida,  and  more  particularly  of  a  new  plantation  begun 
by  the  English  at  Cape  Feare,  on  that  river,  now  by  them  called  Georges 
Eiver,"  published  in  London  in  1666.  The  author  of  this  tract,  whose 
name  is  not  given,  says :  "  In  the  midst  of  this  fertile  province,  in  the 
latitude  of  34°,  there  is  a  colony  of  English  seated,  who  landed  there 
the  29th  of  May,  A.  D.  1664."  After  giving  an  account  of  the  fertility 
of  the  soil  and  its  natural  products,  he  adds:  "But  they  have  brought 
with  them  most  sorts  of  seeds  and  roots  of  the  Barbados,  which  thrive 
in  this  most  temperate  clime.  *  *  *  They  have  indigo,  very  good 
tobacco,  and  cotton  wool."  Eobert  Home  mentions  cotton  among  the 
products  of  South  Carolina  in  1666.     In  Samuel  Wilson's  Account  of  the 

1  History  of  the  United  States,  Vol.  I,  p.  179. 

2  Origin,  Cultivation,  and  Uses  of  Cotton. 

3  Beverly's  History  of  Virginia,  p.  90. 

4  History  of  Virginia,  Appendix  to  Vol.  II. 


32  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Province  of  Carolina  in  America,  addressed  to  the  Earl  of  Craven,  and 
published  in  London  in  1G82,  it  is  stated  that  "  cotton  of  the  Cyprus  and 
Smyrna  sort  grows  well,  and  good  plenty  of  the  seed  is  sent  thither," 
and  among  the  instructions  given  by  the  proprietors  of  South  Carolina 
to  Mr.  West,  the  first  governor,  is  the  following:  u  You  are  then  to  fur- 
nish yourself  with  cotton  seed,  indigo,  and  ginger  roots."  He  was 
also  instructed  to  receive  the  products  of  the  country  in  payment  of 
rents  at  certain  fixed  valuations,  among  which  cotton  was  priced  at  3£d. 
per  pound. 

In  1097,  in  a  memoir  addressed  to  Count  de  Pontchar train  on  the 
importance  of  establishing  a  colony  in  Louisiana,  the  author,1  after 
describing  the  natural  productions  in  the  country,  says:  '<-Sueh  are 
some  of  the  advantages  which  may  be  reasonably  expected,  without 
counting  those  resulting  from  every  day's  experience.  We  might,  for 
example,  try  the  experiment  of  cultivating  long-staple  cotton."  The 
presumption  is  that  the  short-staple  variety  had  already  been  tried. 

In  the  very  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century  cotton  culture  in 
North  Carolina  had  reached  the  extent  of  furnishing  one-fifth  of  the 
people  with  their  clothing.  Lawson,2  speaking  of  the  prosperity  of 
the  country  and  commending  the  industry  of  the  women,  says: 

We  have  not  only  provision  plentiful,  but  clothes  of  our  own  manufacture,  which 
are  made  and  daily  increase,  cotton,  wool,  and  flax  being  of  our  own  growth,  and  the 
women  are  to  be  highly  commended  for  industry  in  spinning  and  ordering  their 
housewifery  to  so  great  an  advantage  as  they  do.  „ 

About  this  time  cotton  became  widely  distributed  and  cotton  patches 
were  common  in  Carolina.  In  fact,  it  is  said  to  have  been  one  of  the 
principal  commodities  of  Carolina  as  early  as  1708,  but  its  culture 
was  only  for  domestic  uses,  and  the  same  authority3  speaks  of  its 
being  spun  by  the  women. 

Charlevoix,4  in  1722,  while  on  his  voyage  down  the  Mississippi,  saw 
"  very  fine  cotton  on  the  tree"  growing  in  the  garden  of  Sieur  le  ISToir, 
and  Captain  Roman,5  of  the  British  army,  saw  in  East  Mississippiblack- 
seeded  cotton  growing  on  the  farm  of  Mr.  Krebs,  and  also  a  machine 
invented  by  Mr.  Krebs  for  the  separation  of  the  seed  and  lint.  This 
was  a  roller  gin,  and  possibly  the  first  ever  in  operation  in  this  country. 

Pickett0  says  that  in  1728  the  colony  of  Louisiana,  which  at  that  date 
occupied  nearly  all  the  southwest  part  of  the  United  States,  including 
Louisiana,  Mississippi,  and  Alabama,  was  in  a  flourishing  condition, 
its  fields  being  cultivated,  by  more  than  2,000  slaves,  in  cotton,  indigo, 
tobacco,  and  grain. 

1  French's  Historical  Collections  of  Louisiana  and  Florida. 

2  History  of  North  Carolina,  p.  142. 

301dmixon,  The  British  Empire  in  America,  1708,  p.  376. 

4  Louisiana  Historical  Collections,  p.  159. 

5  Clayborn's  Mississippi  as  a  Province,  Territory,  and  State,  p.  142. 

6  History  of  Alabama,  Vol.  I,  p.  274. 


HISTORY   AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  33 

Peter  Purry,  the  founder  of  Purryville,  iu  South  Carolina,  in  his 
description  of  the  Province  of  South  Carolina,  drawn  up  in  Charleston 
in  1731,  says:  "  Flax  and  cotton  thrive  admirably." 

In  1731  cotton  seed  was  planted  in  Georgia,  being  sent  there  by  Philip 
Nutter,  of  Chelsea,  England.  Francis  Moore,1  who  visited  Savannah 
in  1735,  in  his  description  of  that  place,  says: 

At  the  bottom  of  the  hill,  well  sheltered  from  the  north  wind  and  iu  the  -warmest 
part  of  the  garden,  there  was  a  collection  of  West  Indian  plants  and  trees,  some 
coffee,  some  cocoanuts,  cotton,  etc. 

About  the  same  time  the  settlers  on  the  Savannah  Eiver,  about  21 
miles  north  of  Savannah,  are  said  to  have  experimented  with  cotton, 
the  date  being  fixed  by  McCall 2  as  1738. 

One  of  the  striking  features  connected  with  the  early  culture  of  cot- 
ton in  the  American  colonies  is  that  it  was  grown  as  far  north  as  the 
thirty-ninth  degree  of  latitude.  Trench  Coxe,  of  Philadelphia,  who 
contributed  so  greatly  to  the  early  success  of  the  culture  and  manufac- 
ture of  cotton  in  the  United  States,  says : 

It  is  a  fact  well  authenticated  to  the  writer  that  the  cultivation  of  cotton  on  the 
garden  scale,  though  not  at  all  as  a  planter's  crop,  was  intimately  known  and  thor- 
oughly practiced  in  the  vicinity  of  Easton,  in  the  county  of  Talbot,  on  the  eastern 
shore  of  the  Chesapeake  Bay,  Maryland,  as  early  as  1736. 

Its  cultivation  was  so  well  understood  in  this  part  of  the  country 
that,  according  to  the  same  authority,  the  necessities  of  the  Eevolu- 
tionary  war  occasioned  it  to  be  raised  for  army  use  in  the  counties  of 
Cape  May,  New  Jersey,  and  Sussex,  Delaware,  and  it  continued  to  be 
raised,  though  only  in  small  quantities  for  family  use.  At  the  time  of 
the  devolution  the  home-grown  cotton  was  sufficiently  abundant  in 
Pennsylvania  to  supply  the  domestic  needs  of  that  State.  Cotton  was 
also  cultivated  in  Charles,  St.  Marys,  and  Dorchester  counties,  Mary- 
land as  late  as  1S26.3  And  at  a  later  date  (1S61-1861)  upland  cotton 
was  cultivated,  and  at  the  prices  current  at  that  date  was  a  most 
profitable  crop  on  the  eastern  shore  of  Maryland.  Cotton  was  grown 
with  very  good  results  in  Northampton  County,  on  the  eastern  shore  of 
Virginia,  in  those  years. 

The  culture  and  improvement  of  cotton  had  received  eonsiderable 
attention  by  the  planters  of  South  Carolina  and  Georgia  as  early  as 
1712.  In  1739  Samuel  Auspourguer 4  attested  under  oath  that  the  "  cli- 
mate and  soil  of  Georgia  are  very  fit  for  raising  cotton." 

William  Spicer  also  certified  to  the  adaptability  of  the  country  for 
cotton  production,  and  that  he  had  "  brought  over  with  him  (to  London) 
several  pods  of  cotton  which  grew  in  Georgia." 

A  tract  entitled  "A  state  of  the  Province  of  Georgia,  attested  under 
oath  in  the  court  of  Savannah,"  published  in  1710,  says  of  cotton  that 

1  Georgia  Historical  Collection,  Vol.  I,  p.  100. 

2  History  of  Georgia,  Vol.  I,  p.  199. 
^Meyer's  Register,  1826. 

4  Georgia  Historical  Collection,  Vol.  II,  p.  196. 
1993— No.  33 3 


34  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

"large  quantities  had  been  raised,  and  it  is  much  planted;  but  the 
cotton,  which  in  some  parts  is  perennial,  dies  here  in  the  winter;  never- 
theless the  annual  is  not  inferior  to  it  in  goodness,  but  requires  more 
trouble  in  cleansing  from  the  seed."  '  In  the  same  tract  it  was  "  pro- 
posed that  a  bounty  be  settled  on  every  product  of  the  land,  viz,  corn, 
peas,  potatoes,  wine,  silk,  cotton,"  etc.  In  "A  description  of  Georgia, 
by  a  gentleman  who  has  resided  there  upward  of  seven  years  and  was 
one  of  the  first  settlers,"  published  in  London  in  1741,  the  author  states 
that  "the  annual  cotton  grows  well  there,  and  has  been  by  some  indus- 
trious people  made  into  clothes." 

Samuel  Seabrook,  in  "An  important  inquiry  into  the  state  and  utility 
of  Georgia,"  published  in  1741,  says:  "Among  other  beneficial  articles 
of  trade  which  it  is  found  can  be  raised  there,  cotton,  of  which  some  has 
also  been  brought  over  as  a  sample,  is  mentioned."  In  his  description 
of  St.  Simons  Island  the  same  author  says: 

The  country  is  well  cultivated,  several  parcels  of  land  not  far  distant  from  the  camp 
of  General  Oglethorpe's  regiment  having  been  granted  in  small  lots  to  the  soldiers, 
many  of  whom  are  married.  *  *  *  The  soldiers  raise  cotton  and  their  wives  spin 
it  and  knit  it  into  stockings. 

A  publication  in  London  in  1762  says:  "What  cotton  and  silk  both 
the  Carolinas  send  us  is  excellent  and  calls  aloud  for  encouragement  of 
its  cultivation  in  a  place  well  adapted  to  raise  both." 2 

Captain  Eobinson,  an  Englishman  who  visited  the  coast  of  Florida 
in  1754,  says  the  "  cotton  tree  was  growing  in  that  country."  The 
Florida  Territory  then  extended  from  the  Atlantic  to  the  Mississippi 
River.  That  it  was  cultivated  in  East  Florida  about  ten  years  after 
this  is  evidenced  by  William  Stork,  who  says:  "I  am  informed  of  a 
gentleman  living  upon  the  St.  Johns  that  the  lauds  on  that  river  below 
Piccolata  are  in  general  good,  and  that  there  is  growing  there  now 
(1765)  good  wheat,  Indian  corn,  indigo,  and  cotton."3 

Cotton  early  attracted  the  attention  of  the  French  colonists  in  Louis- 
iana. In  the  year  1752  Michel,4  in  a  report  to  the  French  minister  on 
the  condition  of  the  country,  gave  interesting  details  of  the  cultivation 
of  cotton  and  the  difficulty  found  in  separating  the  wool  from  the  seed. 

In  1758  white  Siam  seed  was  introduced  into  Louisiana.  Du  Prate 
says :  "  This  East  India  annual  plant  has  been  found  to  be  much  better 
and  whiter  than  what  is  cultivated  in  our  colonies,  which  is  of  the 
Turkey  kind." 

Letters  from  Paris  to  Governor  Roman  state  that  there  is  among  the 
French  archives  at  Paris,  Department  of  Marine  and  Colonies,  a  most 
curious  and  instructive  report  on  cotton  in  1760/'  It  was  found  to  be  a 
very  profitable  crop  in  Louisiana,  for  in  the  year  1768  the  French  plant- 
ers, in  a  memoir  to  their  Government,  complained  tliat  the  parent  Gov- 

1  Patent  Office  Reports,  Vol.  VII,  1853, 1854. 

2  Bishop's  History  of  American  Manufacture. 

3  Stork's  Description  of  East  Florida;  London,  1765. 
4De  Bow's  Review,  Vol.  I,  p.  439. 

BDe  Bow's  Review,  Vol.  I,  p.  300. 


HISTORY    AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS   OF    COTTON.  35 

eminent  had  turned  them  over  to  the  Spaniards  just  "  at  the  time  when 
a  new  mine  had  been  discovered ;  wheu  the  culture  of  cotton,  improved 
by  experience,  promises  the  planter  a  recompense  of  his  toils,  and  fur- 
nishes persons  engaged  in  fitting  out  vessels  with  the  cargoes  to  load 
them." 

In  1762  Captain  Bossu,1  of  the  French  marines,  said :  "  Cotton  of  this 
countr„  Louisiana)  is  of  the  species  called  the  white  cotton  of  Siam. 
It  is  neither  so  fine  nor  so  long  as  the  silk  cotton,  but  it  is,  however, 
very  white  and  very  fine." 

In  1775  the  provincial  congress  of  South  Carolina  recommended  the 
cultivation  of  cotton,  and  in  the  same  year  a  similar  enactment  was 
passed  by  the  Virginia  assembly,  which  declared  that  "  all  persons  hav- 
ing proper  land  ought  to  cultivate  and  raise  a  quantity  of  hemp,  flax, 
and  cotton,  not  only  for  the  use  of  their  own  families,  but  to  spare  to 
others  on  moderate  terms."  This  legislation  no  doubt  was  suggested 
on  account  of  the  changed  relations  of  the  colonies  with  Great  Britair , 

In  1786  Thomas  Jefferson,2  in  a  letter,  says: 

The  four  southernmost  States  make  a  great  deal  of  cotton.  Their  poor  are  almost 
entirely  clothed,  with  it  in  winter  and  summer.  In  winter  they  wear  shirts  of  it  and 
outer  clothing  of  cotton  and  wool  mixed.  In  summer  their  shirts  are  linen,  but  the 
outer  clothing  cotton.  The  dress  of  the  women  is  almost  entirely  of  cotton,  manu- 
factured by  themselves,  except  the  richer  class,  and  even  many  of  these  wear  a  great 
deal  of  homespun  cotton.     It  is  as  well  manufactured  as  the  calicoes  of  Europe. 

At  the  convention  at  Annapolis  in  1786  James  Madison  expressed 
the  conviction  that  from  the  experience  already  had  "  from  the  garden 
practice  in  Talbot  County,  Md.,  and  the  circumstances  of  the  same 
kind  abounding  in  Virginia,  there  was  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the 
United  States  would  one  day  become  a  great  cotton-producing  country." 
This  year  Sea  Island  cotton  seed  was  introduced  into  Georgia,  the  seed 
being  sent  from  the  Bahama  Islands  to  Governor  Tatnall,  William 
Spaulding,3  Bichard  Leake,  and  Alexander  Pisset,  of  that  State.  The 
cotton  adapted  itself  to  the  climate,  and  every  successive  year  from 
1787  saw  long-staple  cotton  extending  itself  along  the  shores  of  South 
Carolina  and  Georgia. 

According  to  Thomas  Spaulding,  the  first  planter  who  attempted 
cotton  culture  on  a  large  scale  was  Bichard  Leake,  of  Savannah,  but 
the  editor  of  Niles  Begister  (1824)  says  that  Nichol  Turnbull,  a  native 
of  Smyrna,  was  the  first  planter  who  cultivated  cotton  upon  a  scale 
for  exportation.  His  residence  was  at  Deptford  Hall,  3  miles  from 
Savannah,  where  he  died  in  1824. 

In  a  letter,  dated  Savannah,  December  11,  1788,  to  Col.  Thomas 
Proctor,  of  Philadelphia,  Leake  says : 

I  have  been  this  year  an  adventurer  (and  the  first  that  has  attempted  it  on  a  large 
scale)  in  introducing  a  new  staple  for  the  planting  interests — the  article  of  cotton — 
samples  of  which  I  beg  leave  now  to  send  you  and  request  you  will  lay  them  before 


1  Travels  through  the  Province  of  North  America  called  Louisiana. 

2Notes  on  the  State  of  Virginia,  1781. 

3  Thomas  Spaulding  in  Niles  Register,  1828. 


36  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

the  Philadelphia  Society  for  Encouraging  Manufactures,  that  the  quality  may  he 
inspected.  Several  here,  as  well  as  in  North  Carolina,  have  follo,we<l  me  and  tried 
the  experiment,  aud  it  is  likely  to  answer  our  most  sanguine  expectations.  I  shall 
raise  ahout  5,000  pounds  in  the  seed  from  8  acres  of  land,  and  next  year  I  intend  to 
plant  about  50  to  100  acres  if  suitable  encouragement  is  given.  The  principal  diffi- 
culty that  arises  to  us  is  the  cleansing  it  from  the  seed,  which  I  am  told  they  do 
with  great  dexterity  and  ease  in  Philadelphia  with  gins  or  machines  made  for  the 
purpose.  *  *  *  I  am  told  they  make  those  that  will  clean  30  to  40  pounds  clean 
cotton  in  a  day  and  upon  very  simple  construction. 

The  first  attempt  in  South  Carolina  to  produce  Sea  Island  cotton  was 
made  in  1788  by  Mrs.  Kinsey  Burden  at  Burdens  Island.  As  early  as 
1779  the  short  staple  was  produced  by  her  husband,  whose  negroes 
were  clothed  in  homespun  cotton  cloth.  Mrs.  Burden's  efforts  failed. 
The  plants  did  not  mature,  and  this  was  attributed  to  the  seed,  which 
was  of  the  Bourbon  variety.  The  first  successful  variety  appears  to 
have  been  grown  by  William  Elliot  on  Hilton  Head,  near  Beaufort,  in 
1790,  with  5^  bushels  of  seed,  which  he  bought  in  Charleston  and  for 
which  he  paid  14s.  a  bushel.     He  sold  his  crop  for  lO.kl.  a  pound. 

In  1791  John  Scriven,  of  St.  Lukes  Parish,  planted  30  to  40  acres  on 
St.  Marys  Biver.  He  sold  it  for  from  Is.  2d.  to  Is.  Gd.  per  pound.  It 
is  certain  that  at  this  period  many  planters  on  the  Sea  Islands  and  con- 
tiguous mainland  experimented  with  long-staple  cotton,  and  probably  it 
was  produced  by  them  for  market. 

One  of  the  earliest  reports  of  export  of  cotton  from  the  Colonies  is  a 
bill  of  lading  which  certifies  that  on  July  20,  1751,  Henry  Hansen 
shipped,  "in  good  order  and  well  conditioned,  in  and  upon  the  good 
snow  called  the  Mary,  whereof  is  master  under  God,  for  this  present 
voyage,  Barnaby  Badgers,  and  now  riding  in  the  harbour  of  New  York, 
and  by  God's  grace  bound  for  London — to  say — eighteen  bales  of  cot 
ton  wool,  being  marked  and  numbered  as  in  the  margin,1  and  are  to  be 
delivered  in  like  good  order,  and  conditioned,  at  the  aforesaid  port  of 
London  (the  danger  of  the  sea  only  excepted),  unto  Messrs.  Horke  and 
Champior  or  their  assigns,  he  or  they  paying  freight  for  the  said  goods, 
three  farthings  per  pound  primage  and  average  accustomed." 

The  feeling  regarding  the  culture  and  manufacture  of  cotton  in  the 
Colonies  at  this  period  may  be  gathered  from  the  following  extract 
from  a  letter  of  July  7, 1749,  addressed  by  the  Georgia  office  of  London 
to  the  governor  of  Georgia: 

You  say,  sir,  likewise  in  your  letter,  that  the  people  of  Vernonburgh  and  Acton 
are  giving  visible  appearance  of  revising  their  industry ;  that  they  are  propagating 
large  quantities  of  flax  and  cotton,  and  that  they  are  provided  with  weavers,  who 
have  already  wove  several  large  pieces  of  cloth  of  a  useful  sort,  whereof  they  sold 
divers,  and  some  they  made  use  of  in  their  own  families.  The  account  of  their 
industry  is  highly  satisfactory  to  the  trustees;  but  as  to  manufacturing  the  produces 
they  raise,  they  must  expect  no  encouragement  from  the  trustees,  for  setting  up 
manufactures  which  may  interfere  with  those  of  England  might  occasion  com- 
plaints here,  for  which  reason  you  must,  as  they  will,  discountenance  them ;  and  it 
is  necessary  for  you  to  direct  the  industry  of  these  people  into  a  way  which  might 

'Five  bales  marked  III,  No.  1  to  5;  13  bales  marked  II,  No.  1  to  13. 


HISTORY    AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  37 

be  more  beneficial  to  themselves  and  "would  prove  satisfactory  to  the  trustees  and 
the  public ;  that  is,  to  show  them  what  advantages  they  will  reap  from  the  produce 
of  silk,  which  they  will  receive  immediate  pay  for,  and  that  this  will  not  interfere 
with  or  prevent  their  raising  flax  or  cotton,  or  any  other  produces  for  exportation, 
unmanufactured.     *     *     * 

A  pamphlet  entitled  A  Description  of  South  Carolina  states  that 
cotton  was  imported  to  Carolina  from  the  West  Indies,  and  it  is  prob- 
able that  the  early  shipments  from  this  country  were  of  this  West 
Indian  cotton,  although  English  writers  mentioned  it  as  an  import  of 
Carolina  cotton.1 

Donnell  says: 

The  first  regular  exportation  of  cotton  from  Charleston  was  in  1785,  when  one  bag 
arrived  at  Liverpool,  per  ship  Diana,  to  John  and  Isaac  Teasdale  &  Co.  The  expor- 
tation of  cotton  from  the  United  States  could  not  have  been  much  earlier,  for  we 
find  in  1781  eight  bags  shipped  to  England  were  seized  on  the  ground  of  fraudulent 
importation,-  as  it  was  not  believed  that  so  much  cotton  could  be  produced  iu  the 
United  States. 

The  exportation  during  the  next  six  years  was  successively  6, 14, 109, 
389,  842,  and  81  bags.:i 

Dana  gives4  the  following  data  concerning  the  export  movement  from 
1739  to  1793: 

1739. — Samuel  Auspourguer,  a  Swiss  living  in  Georgia,  took  over  to  London,  at  the 
time  of  the  controversy  about  the  introduction  of  slaves,  a  sample  of  cotton 
raised  by  him  in  Georgia.  This  we  may  call,  in  the  absence  of  a  better  start- 
ing point,  the  first  export. 

1747. — During  this  year  several  bags  of  cotton,  valued  at  £3  lis.  5d.  per  bag,  were 
exported  from  Charleston.  Doubts  as  to  this  being  of  American  growth 
have  been  expressed,  but  as  cotton  had  been  cultivated  iu  South  Carolina  for 
many  years  there  does  not  seem  to  be  any  reason  for  such  doubts.  Besides, 
English  writers  mention  it  is  a^an  import  of  Carolina  cotton. 

1753. — "Some  cotton"  is  mentioned  among  the  exports  of  Carolina  in  1753,  and  of 
Charleston  in  1757.     *     *     * 

1761. — Eight  (8)  bags  of  cotton  imported  into  Liverpool  from  the  United  States. 

1770. — Three  (3)  bales  shipped  to  Liverpool  from  New  York;  ten  (10)  bales  from 
Charleston;  four  (4)  from  Virginia  and  Maryland,  and  three  (3)  barrels  from 
North  Carolina. 

1784. — About  fourteen  (14)  bales  shipped  to  Great  Britain,  of  which  eight  (8)  were 
seized  as  improperly  entered.     [See  above.] 

1785. — Five  (5)  bags  imported  at  Liverpool. 

1786. — Nine  hundred  (900)  pounds  imported  into  Liverpool. 

1787. — Sixteen  thousand  three  hundred  and  fifty  (16,350)  pounds  imported  into  Liver- 
pool. 

1788. — Fifty-eight  thousand  five  hundred  (58,500)  pounds  imported  into  Liverpool. 

1789. — One  hundred  and  twenty-seven  thousand  five  hundred  (127,500)  pounds  im- 
ported into  Liverpool. 

L  Caesar's  Cotton  Culture  iu  the  Bombay  Presidency. 

2  The  laws  of  England  at  that  time  required  imports  to  be  in  ships  of  the  country 
from  which  the  product  was  exported. 
3DouueH's  History  of  Cotton,  p.  9. 
4  Cotton  from  .Seed  to  Loom,  p,  24. 


38  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

1790. — Fourteen  thousand  (14,000)  pounds  imported  into  Liverpool.  We  can  find  no 
reason  for  this  marked  decline  in  the  exports  except  it  may  l>o  that  the  crop 
was  a  failure  that  year.  Our  first  supposition  was  that  the  cause  was  one  of 
price,  hut  on  examining  the  quotations  in  Took's  work  on  "high  and  low 
prices"  we  do  not  see  any  marked  decline  in  the  values  of  other  descriptions 
of  cotton,  and  the  American  staple  is  not  given  in  his  list  until  1793. 

1791. — One  hundred  and  eighty-nine  thousand  live  hundred  (189,500)  pounds  imported 
into  Liverpool,  the  price  averaging  here  26  cents. 

1792. — One  hundred  and  thirty-eight  thousand  three  hundred  and  twenty-eight 
(138,328)  pounds  imported  into  Liverpool. 

Great  difficulty  was  experienced  in  separating  the  seed  from  the  lint 
of  upland  cotton.  The  work  was  done  by  hand,  the  task  being-  4  pounds 
of  lint  cotton  per  week  from  each  head  of  a  family,  in  addition  to  the 
usual  field  work.  This  would  amount  to  one  bale  in  two  years.  A 
French  planter  of  Louisiana  (Dubreuil)  is  said  to  have  invented  a 
machine  for  separating  lint  and  seed  as  early  as  1742.  The  demand  for 
such  a  machine  not  being  very  great  at  that  date,  no  record  as  to  its 
character  has  been  preserved.  The  roller  gin,  in  very  much  the  same  form 
as  IsTearchus,  the  admiral  of  Alexander  the  Great,  found  it  in  India,  was 
still  in  use.  In  1790  Dr.  Joseph  Eve,  originally  from  the  Bahamas,  but 
then  a  resident  of  Augusta,  Ga.,  made  great  improvements  on  this 
ancient  machine,  and  adapted  it  to  be  run  by  horse  or  water  power.  A 
correspondent  of  the  American  Museum,  writing  from  Charleston,  S.  C, 
in  July  of  that  year,  states  "  that  a  gentleman  well  acquainted  with 
the  cotton  manufacture  had  already  completed  and  in  operation,  on  the 
high  hills  of  Santee,  near  Statesburg,  ginning,  carding,  and  other 
machines  driven  by  water,  and  also  spinning  machines  witli  eighty-five 
spindles  each,  with  every  article  necessary  for  manufacturing  cotton." 
A  machine  dating  anterior  to  this  year,  and  having  a  strong  resem- 
blance to  the  above,  possessing  in  fact  all  the  essentials  of  a  modern 
cotton  gin,  was  exhibited  at  the  Atlanta  Exposition  in  1882.  It  came 
from  the  neighborhood  of  Statesburg,  but  its  history  could  not  be 
ascertained. 

In  1793  Eli  Whitney  petitioned  for  a  patent  for  the  invention  of  the 
saw  cotton  gin.  His  claims  were  disputed,  and  he  defended  tbem  in 
the  State  and  Federal  courts  for  nearly  a  generation,  obtaining  at  last 
a  verdict  in  his  favor.  Meanwhile  the  saw  gin  had  become  an  estab- 
lished fact,  and  the  planter  at  last  had  a  machine  which  enabled  him 
to  produce  cotton  at  a  cost  that  would  leave  him  a  good  profit.  The 
first  saw  gin  to  be  run  by  water  power  was  erected  in  1795  by  James 
Kiucaid  near  Monticello,  in  Fairfield  County,  S.  C.  Others  were  put  up 
near  Columbia  by  Wade  Hampton,  sr.,  in  1797,  and  in  the  year  follow- 
ing he  gathered  and  ginned  from  600  acres  600  bales  of  cotton. 

The  cotton  exportation  from  the  United  States  increased  from  487,600 
pounds  in  1793  to  1,600,000  pounds  in  1794,  the  year  in  which  Whitney's 
gin  was  patented.  In  1796,  a  year  after  he  had  improved  his  machine, 
the  production  had  risen  to  10,000,000  pounds.  In  fact,  the  increased 
production  was  so  great  that  the  planters  began  to  fear  they  would 


HISTORY   AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  OV 

overstock  the  market,  and  one  of  tbern,  upon  looking  at  liis  newly  gath- 
ered crop,  exclaimed:  "Well,  I  liave  done  with  cultivation  of  cotton; 
there's  enough  in  that  ginhouse  to  make  stockings  for  all  the  people 
in  America."  Yet  the  production  of  cotton  did  not  advance  with  that 
rapidity  to  which  Ave  are  now  accustomed. 

The  cotton  industry  being  of  secondary  importance  prior  to  1790, 
information  and  statistics  relative  to  the  amount  produced  are  not  avail- 
able, but  the  following  table '  gives  the  production  at  different  dates 
from  that  time  to  1895 : 

Cotton  crops  of  the  United  States  at  stated  periods. 

[Expressed  in  bales  of  400  pounds  net.] 


1790-91 
1791-92 
1796-97 
1800-01 
1801-02 
1806-07 
1811-12 
1816-17 
1821-22 
1826-27 
1834-35 
1840-41 
1850-51 
1855-56 


Season. 


1859-60 
1865-66 
1869-70 
1873-74 
1878-79 
1880-81 
1884-85 
1887-88 
1890-91 
1891-92 
1893-94 
1894-95 
1895-96. 


Bales. 


602,  639 
501,  921 
434,  806 
629,131 
670,  368 
596,  613 
562.  090 
227,178 
231,  696 
684,  336 
946,  533 
406,  486 
976,  045 


Within  one  hundred  years,  from  1790  to  1S90,  the  production  of  cot- 
ton in  the  United  States  increased  from  5,000  bales  to  over  10,000,000 
bales.  The  crop  of  1891-95  exceeded  that  of  1878-79  by  nearly  6,000,000 
bales,  or  over  100  per  cent  increase  in  sixteen  years. 

The  following  tables  show  the  cotton  acreage  for  the  years  1878  to 
1896,  inclusive,  and  the  estimated  production  and  exportation  of  Sea 
Island  cotton  for  the  years  18S0  to  1894,  inclusive: 

Acreage  in  cotton  in  the  United  States  :  1878  to  1896. 


Season. 


North 
Carolina. 


1878-79 ... 

1879-80 

1880-81 

1881-82 

1882-83 1     1,  050,  543 

1883-84 1     1,  050,  543 

1884-85 !     1,  061,  048 

1885-86 -     1.  071,  058 


icres. 

590,  500 

625.  900 

933,  000 

1,  061, 155 


1886-87. 
1887-88. 
1888-89. 
1889-90. 
1890-91 . 
1891-92. 
1892-93. 
1893-94. 
1894-95. 
1895-96. 
1896-97. 


1,  071,  658 
1,  006,  301 
1,071,633 
1.147,  136 
1,  036,  026 
1,014,270 
833,  695 
1,  180.000 
1,  296,  522 
1.050,  183 
1,228,714 


South 
Carolina. 


Acres. 
944,  650 
944,  600 
1,  441,  600 
1,  619,  639 
1,  618,  989 
1,618,989 
1,  716, 128 
1,  733,  289 
1,655,291 
1,  622, 185 
1,  640,  518 
1,  987,  469 
1,  682,  522 
1,  663,  997 
1, 482,  222 

1,  885,  000 

2,  160,  391 
1,814,728 
2,  014.  348 


Georgia. 


Florida.  ;  Alabama. 


Missis- 
sippi. 


Acres. 
1,  483,  500 

1,  592,  000 

2,  786,  300 
2,  994,  005 
2,  872,  748 
2,  872,  748 

2,  958,  930 

3,  047,  698 
2,  956,  267 
2,  941,  486 

2,  970,  901 

3,  345,  104 
3,  086,  682 
2,  991.  027 

2,  841,  580 

3,  050.  000 
3,  610.  968 
3,  069,  323 
3, 468,  335 


Acres. 
166.  650 
161.600 
251.  600 

263,  032 
257.  799 
257,  799 
268.  Ill 
273,  473 

270,  738 
262,  616 
259,  990 
227,  370 
280,  147 

271,  467 
214,  017 
165,  000 
201,  621 
191,540 

264,  325 


Acres. 
1,  837,  550 

1,  892.  700 

2,  460,  600 
2,  639,  988 
2,610,420 
2,  610,  420 
2,  740,  941 
2,  795,  760 
2,  823,  718 
2,  809,  599 
2,851,743 

2,  761, 165 

3.  096,  232 
3,  000,  282 
2,  607.  616 
2,316,000 
2,  664,  861 
2.371,720 
2,  656,  333 


Acres. 
2,  055,  050 
2,  055,  000 
2,  275,  000 
2,  351,  228 
2,  278,  521 
2,  278,  521 
2,  392,  447 
2,  535,  994 
2,  548,  674 
2,  548,  674 
2,  592,  001 
2,  883,  278 
2,  965,  614 
2,  903.  327 
2, 571,  684 
2.  845,  400 
2,  826,  272 
2.  487. 119 
2,  835,  316 


1  Except  where  otherwise  stated,  the  statistics  used  in  this  article  are  taken  mainly 
from  Rpt.  IT.  S.  Senate  Com.  on  Agr.  and  Forestry,  Feb.  23, 1895;  Snepperson's  Cotton 
Facts,  1895,  and  reports  of  the  Bureau  of  Statistics,  U.  S.  Treasury. 


40  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Acreage  in  cotton  in  the  United  States:  1878  to  1S9G—  Continued . 


1878  79 
1879-80 
1880-81 
1881-82 
1882-83 
1883-84 
1884-85 
1885-86 
1886-87 
1887-88 
1888-89 
1889-90 
1890-91 
1891-92. 
1892-93 
1893-94 
1894-95 
1895-96. 
1896-97 


Louisiana 


Acres. 

1,  348,  950 

1,322,000 

888,  000 

944, 174 

931,900 

931,900 

922,  581 

1,005,613 

1,  035,  781 

1,066,854 

1,088,191 

1,270,154 

1,107,138 

1,  094,  949 

897,  469 

946,  000 

1,313,296 

1,  142,  568 

1,245,399 


Texas. 


Acres. 

1,  808,  400 
1,935.000 

2,  395, 100 

2.  676,  298 

3.  034,  922 
3.  034, 922 
3, 186,  668 
3,  505.  335 
3,771,740 
3, 960,  327 
4,158,343 

3,  934,  525 

4,  956, 145 
5, 198,  643 
4,431,729 
4, 153.  760 
6,  854,  621 

5,  £26,  428 

6,  758,  656 


Arkansas. 


Acres. 
1,165,850 
1, 177,  500 
1,080,200 
1,181,692 
1,188.545 
1, 188,  545 
1,  259,  858 
1,348  048 
1,354,788 
1,  388,  658 
1,416,431 
1,700,578 
1,494,333 
1,  492,  809 
1,  247,  239 
1,867,250 
1,483,319 
1, 186,  655 
1,542,652 


Tennessee. 


A  cres. 
740.  700 
702,  900 
816,  200 
840,  990 
807,  602 

807,  602 
815,  678 
864,  618 
847,  326 
855,  799 
881,473 
747,471 
995, 181 
964,  341 

808,  235 
805,  920 
879.  954 
712.763 
912,337 


All  other. 


A  cres. 
125,000 

120,  300 
147,  700 

138,  529 

139,  508 
126,  004 

117,  222 
119,379 
118,622 

118,  568 

121,  367 
167,  646 
109,  033 

119,  825 
132,  438 
310,  670 
396, 125 
331,  335 
518,919 


Total. 


Acres. 
12,  266,  800 
12,  595,  500 

15,  475,  300 

16,  710,  730 
16,  791,  557 
16,777,993 
17,439,612 
18,  300,  865 
18,454,603 

18,  641,  007 

19,  058,  591 

20,  171,  896 
20,  809,  053 
20,  714, 937 

18,  067,  924 

19,  525,  000 
23,  687,  950 
20, 184,  368 
23,  445,  334 


Estimated  Sea  Island  cotton  crop  of  the  United  States  and  exjwrts  of  same  since  1880. 


Year. 


1880-81 
1881-82 
1882-83 
1883-84 
1884-85 
1885-86 
1886-87 
1887-88 
1888-89 
1889-90 
1890-91 
1891-92 
1892-93 
1893-94 
1894-95 


Florida.    Georgia.    Carolina.     Texas-        Total-      Exports. 


Bat 
16, 
20, 
16, 
16, 
23, 
23, 
29, 
22, 
22, 
23, 
22, 
17, 
9, 
19, 
15, 


Hales. 
3, 179 
6,049 
3,126 
1,399 
4,327 
5,780 
6,411 
8,304 

12.  000 

13,  629 

29,  613 

30,  576 
28,  324 
39,  367 
53,  703 


South 


Bales. 
14.  868 
10,796 
10,591 
7,329 
12,  588 
8,497 
8,735 
8,561 
9,618 
9,  256 
16.  306 
11,499 
7,212 
2,578 
5,894 


Bales. 

35,  021 
37,  862 

36,  709 
25.  490 
40,  452 

37,  778 
45, 137 
39,  479 
44,  089 
46,  803 
68, 133 
59,  134 
45.418 
61,  052 
74,  628 


Bales. 
24,  395 
24, 756 
23,  457 
13,  579 

21,  565 
16,  428 

26,  651 
20,  613 
23,  326 
28,  242 
39, 123 

27,  431 

22,  540 
38.021 
40,  744 


The  first  cotton  mill  erected  in  the  United  States  was  built  at  Bev- 
erly, Mass.,  in  1 787-88.  This  was  soon  followed  by  others  in  various 
towns  along  the  east  border  of  the  country,  especially  Pawtucket  and 
Providence,  P.  L,  Boston,  Mass.,  New  Haven  and  Norwich,  Conn.,  New 
York  City,  Paterson,  N.  J.,  Philadelphia,  Pa.,  and  Statesburg,  S.  O. 
In  them  carding  and  spinning  were  done  by  machinery,  but  the  weav- 
ing was  on  hand  looms  until  1815,  at  which  date  a  power-loom  mill  was 
started  at  Waltham,  Mass.  The  use  of  hand  looms  and  spinning 
wheels  for  cotton  manufacture  was  common  in  all  parts  of  the  country 
before  the  Eevolution,  especially  in  the  Southern  colonies,  and  these 
continued  to  be  used  by  the  women  in  their  houses  many  years  after 
the  erection  of  cotton  factories.  * 

In  1831  there  were  in  the  United  States  801  cotton  mills,  with  33,433 
looms  and  1,246,703  spindles,  employing  62,208  persons  and  consuming 
77,457,316  pounds  of  raw  cotton,  with  $40,612,984  capital.  In  1860  there 
were  1,091  mills,  with  126,313  looms  and  5,235,727  spindles,  employing 
122,028  workmen,  and  having  $98,585,269  capital.  The  raw  material 
used  was  422,704,975  pounds,  valued  at  $57,285,534,  and  the  value  of 
the  finished  product  was  $115,681,774. 


HISTORY    AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON. 


41 


During  the  great  "cotton  famine"  caused  by  the  civil  war  the  pro- 
duction of  cotton  in  the  United  States  practically  ceased,  and  it  was 
not  until  1867-68  that  the  cotton  industry  regained  the  position  it  had 
held  in  1860.  From  that  period  until  1880  there  was  irregular  but 
decided  growth  in  the  industry. 

The  supply  and  consumption  of  cotton  in  the  United  States  from 
1791  to  1895  is  shown  in  the  following  table,  compiled  by  Watkins:1 

Production  and  consumption  of  cotton  in  the  United  States  from  1791  to  1S05,  inclusive. 


1790-1791. 

1791-1792- 

1792-1793. 

1793-1794. 

1794-1795. 

1795-1796. 

1796-1797. 

1797-1798. 

1798-1799. 

1799-1800. 

1800-1801. 

1801-1802. 

1802-1803. 

1803-1804. 

1804-1805. 

1805-1806. 

1806-1807. 

1807-1808. 

1808-1809. 

1809-1810. 

1810-1811. 

1811-1812 

1812-1813. 

1813-1814. 

1814-1815. 

1815-1816. 

1816-1817. 

1817-1818. 

1818-1819. 

1819-1820. 

1820-1821. 

1821-1822. 

1822-1823. 

1823-1824. 

1824-1825. 

1825-1826 

1826-1827. 

1827-1828. 

1828-1829. 

1829-1830. 

1830-1831. 

1831-1832. 

1832-1833 

1833-1834. 

1834-1835. 

1835-1836. 

1836-1837. 

1837-1838. 

1833-1839. 

1839-1840. 

1840-1841. 

1841-1842. 

1842-1843. 

1843-1844. 

1844-1845. 


Crop. 


Bales. 

8,889 

13,  333 

22,  222 

35,  556 

35,  556 

44, 444 

48,  889 

66,  667 

88,  889 

155,556 

210,  526 

241,  228 

252, 101 

240,  741 

281,128 

347,  826 

285,  714 

271,739 

366,  071 

340, 000 

269,  360 

304, 878 

304, 878 

284.  553 

363.636 

457,  565 

460,  993 

448, 029 

596, 429 

606.  061 

647, 482 

742,  049 

620,  805 

762,411 

891,608 

1,121,667 

957,  281 

720,  593 

870, 415 

976.  845 

1,038,847 

987.  477 

1,  070.  438 

1,205,394 

1,254,328 

1,360,725 

1,423,930 

1,801,497 

1,  360,  532 
2, 177,  835 
1,634,954 
1,683,574 
2,378,875 

2,  030,  409 
2, 394,  503 

1845-1846 i     2,100,537 

1840-1847 1    1,778.651 

1847-1848 (     2,439,786 

1848-1849 [    2,866,938 

aXo  data. 


Consump- 
tion. 


Bales. 

(a) 
(«) 
(a) 
(a) 
(«) 
(a) 
(«) 
(«) 
(a) 

35, 556 

39,  474 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

44,177 

(«) 

(«) 

(a) 

(a) 

64,  000 

57,  239 

(a) 

(«) 

(a) 

90,  000 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

la) 

149,  516 
120,  593 
118,853 
126,  512 
182,  142 
173, 800 
194,  412 
196,413 
216.  888 
236,  733 
222, 540 
246, 063 
276, 018 
295,  193 
297,  288 
267,  850 
325, 129 
346,  750 
389,  000 
422,  600 
428,  000 
616,044 
642, 4S5 


Stock 

Exports. 

(close  of 

year). 

Bales. 

Bales. 

889 

(a) 

635 

(a) 

2  222 

(a) 

7,407 

(a) 

27,  822 

(a) 

27, 141 

(a) 

16,  837 

(a) 

41,  600 

(a) 

42,  366 

(a) 

79,  066 

(«) 

91,716 

(a) 

120,  619 

W 

158,  454 

(a) 

129,  756 

(a) 

154, 101 

(a) 

155,  032 

(a) 

228,  362 

(a) 

38,  516 

(a) 

227,  635 

(a) 

373,  046 

(a) 

208.  950 

(a) 

117,428 

(a) 

77,  683 

(«) 

72,  069 

(a) 

301,814 

(a) 

302,  388 

(a) 

303,  721 

(a) 

331,438 

(n) 

314,  275 

(") 

484,  319 

(«) 

449,  257 

(a-) 

511,219 

(a) 

582,  964 

(a) 

504,  857 

(a) 

616,  958 

(«) 

655,  562 

(a) 

854, 000 

(a) 

600,  000 

40,  000 

740,  000 

30,  000 

839, 000 

35,  000 

773,  000 

119,000 

892,  000 

41,  600 

867,  000 

48,  200 

1, 028,  000 

29,  600 

1,  023,  000 

41,  600 

1, 116,  000 

43,  300 

1,169,000 

75,  800 

1,  575,  000 

40,  300 

1,  074,  000 

52,  250 

1,  876,  000 

58,  442 

1,  313,  500 

72,  479 

1,465,500 

31.  807 

2,010,000 

94, 480 

1,629,500 

159.  772 

2,  0S3,  700 

98,  420 

1,666,700 

107, 122 

1,241,200 

214,  837 

1,  858,  000 

171,468 

2,  228,  000 

154,753 

Net 
weight 
of  bales. 


Pounds. 
225 
225 
225 
225 
225 
225 


225 
228 
228 
238 
270 
249 
230 
280 
276 
224 
250 
297 
246 
246 
246 
275 
271 
282 
279 
280 
264 
278 
283 
298 
282 
286 
312 
331 
335 
341 
339 
341 
360 
350 
363 
367 
373 
379 
379 
384 
383 
394 
397 
409 
412 
415 
411 
436 
411 
437 


1  Production  and  Price  of  Cotton  for  One  Hundred  Years,  IT.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div. 
of  Stat.  Misc.  Bnl.  9. 


42  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

Production  and  consumption  of  cotton  in  the  Ignited  States,  etc. — Continued. 


Tear. 


1849-50 
1850-51 
1851-52 
1852-53 
1853-54 
1854-55 
1855-56 
1856-57 
1857-58 
1858-59 
1859-60 
1860-61 
1861-62 
1862-63 
1863-64 
1864-65 
1865-66 
1866-67 
1867-68 
3868-69 
1869-70 
1870-71 
1871-72 
1872-73 
1873-74 
1874-75 
1875-76 
1876-77 
1877-78 
1878-79 
1879-80 
1880-81 
1881-82 
1882-83 
1883-84 
1884-85 
1885-86 
1886-87 
1887-88 
1888-89 
1889-90 
1890-91 
1891-92 
1892-93 
1893-94 
1894-95 


Crop. 


Bales. 
2,  333,  718 

2,  454,  442 
3,120,310 

3,  416,  214 
3,  074,  979 
2, 982,  634 
3,  655,  557 
3, 093,  737 

3,  257, 339 
4,018,914 
4,861,292 
3, 849, 469 

0,4,  500, 000 
al,  600,  000 
b 450, 000 
6300,000 
2,  269.  316 
2, 097,  254 
2,  519,  554 
2,  366, 467 
3, 122,  551 

4,  352,  317 

2,  974,  351 

3,  930,  508 
4, 170,  388 
3,832,991 

4,  632,  313 

4,  474.  069 
4, 773,'  865 

5,  074, 155 
5,761,252 

6,  605,  750 

5,  456,  048 

6,  949,  756 
5,  713,  200 

5,  706,  165 

6,  575, 691 
6, 505,  087 

7,  046,  833 
6  938,290 

7,  311,  322 

8,  652,  597 
9, 035,  379 

6,  700,  365 

7,  549,  817 
c9,  476,  435 


Consump- 
tion. 


Bali's. 

613,  498 

485,  614 

689,  603 

803, 725 

737,  236 

706,417 

777,  739 

819,  936 

595,  562 

927,  651 

978,  043 

843, 740 

o370,  000 

a288,  000 

«220,  000 

0345,  000 

666, 100 

770,  030 

906,  636 

926,  374 

865, 160 

1, 110, 196 

1,  237,  330 

1,201,127 

1,  305,  943 

1,193,005 

1,351,870 

1,428,013 

1,489,022 

1,558,329 

1,789,978 

1,938,937 

1,  964,  535 

2,  073,  096 
1,  876,  683 

1,  753, 125 
2, 162,  544 
2,111,532 

2,  257,  247 
2,  314,  091 
2,390,959 
2,  632,  023 
2,  876,  846 
2,  431,  134 
2,  319,  688 
2,704,153 


Stock 

Exports. 

(close  of 

year). 

Bales. 

Bales. 

1,  590,  200 

167,930 

1,988,710 

128,  304 

2,  443,  046 

91,  170 

2,  52K,  400 

135,  643 

2,  319, 148 

135,  603 

2,  244,  209 

143,  330 

2,  954,  606 

04,  171 

2,  252,  657 

49,  258 

2,  590,  455 

102,  926 

3,021,403 

149,  237 

3,  774,  173 

227,  708 

3,  127,  568 

83, 127  ; 

644,  936 

(b) 

10,  898 

(b) 

27,  053 

(b) 

24,  787 

(b) 

1,554,664 

283,  692 

1,  557,  054 

80,  296 

1,  655,  816 

37,  398 

1,465,880 

11,160 

2,  206,  480 

65,  325 

3, 109,  009 

144,  290 

1,957,314 

59,  287 

2,  679, 986 

104,782 

2,  840, 981 

124,  795  . 

2,  684,  708 

74,411 

3, 234, 244 

130,041 

3,  030,  835 

130,  493 

3,  360,  254 

45,  784 

3,481,004 

65,  948 

9,  885,  003 

141,418 

4, 589,  346 

218,  043 

3,  582,  622 

124,  232  ! 

4,  766,  597 

237, 117 

3,916,581 

116,  190 

3,  947,  972 

132,  421 

4,  336, 203 

178, 026 

4,  445,  302 

86,  269 

4,  627,  502 

180,  062 

4,  742,  347 

65,  624 

4,  906,  027 

75, 195 

5,  847, 191 

215,  692 

5,  933,  437 

421,104 

4,445,338 

237,  411 

5, 287, 887 

180,912 

6,  614,  619 

405,  519 

a  Estimated. 
b  Xo  data. 


c  Estimate  of  Department  of  Agriculture. 


The  exports  of  cotton  from  the  United  States  to  Great  Britain  from 
1780  to  1790  averaged  only  ^  of  the  total  cotton  imports  of  that  coun- 
try, but  sixty  years  later,  from  1816  to  1S50,  the  United  States  supplied 
four-fifths  of  Great  Britain's  demand  for  cotton.  From  1780  to  1790 
the  average  amount  of  cotton  imported  by  Great  Britain  from  the 
United  States  was  100  bales  (of  100  pounds  each);  from  1816  to  1820, 
166,310  bales;  from  1846  to  1850, 1,297,230  bales ;  and  from  1876  to  1880, 
2,589,070  bales.  Of  the  supply  of  cotton  available  for  the  United  States 
and  Europe  in  1850-51  the  United  States  furnished  2,536,000  bales,  or 
81  per  cent,  and  although  the  gross  production  has  so  greatly  increased 
since  that  date  that  in  1891-92  the  United  States  produced  10,661,000 
bales,  the  proportion  of  the  cotton  available  for  Europe  and  the  United 
States  furnished  by  the  United  States  has  never  been  greater  than  82 
per  cent  (in  1892). 


Price  in  cents 
perlb. middling 
in  New  York. 

"K 

■K 

S) 

5 

_1 

X 

< 
26. 

28. 

16. 

14. 

21. 

17. 

8. 

12.5 

10.04 

6. 

13.5 

8.92 

8.5 

1.3. 

11.21 

10.25 

13.87 

12.34 

10.75 

11.82 

11. 

70. 

187. 

101.50 

26.5 

42. 

31.59 

14.87 

21.13 

16.95 

10.5 

13. 

11.35 

9.5 

11.5 

10.71 

10.25 

11.62 

11.53 

7.93 

10.62 

9.03 

6.69 

8.75 

7.64 

6.18 

10. 

8.24 

6.87 

6.56 

7.67 

5.56 

7.37 

6.26 

,  Expt.  Sta.  Bui,  33. 

Production   and   Consumption   of  Cotton   in   bales  of  400   lb.  weight   by  the  Countries  contributing  to  the 
world's  supply   and   demand   for  a  series  of  years  from    1790  to    1895. 
By  Harry  Hammond. 

inch. 


Scale:    i.ooo.c 


ales  of  400  lb 


CONSUMPTION 


M 

B 

r 

Ch. 

nr — ' 

UNITED   STATES,   NORTH 
UNITED  STATES,  SOUTH 
GREAT    BRITAIN 
CONTINENT  OF   EUROPE 
INDIA 
VARIOUS 


G 

C 

HDoc    267    54  2 


HISTORY   AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON. 


43 


The  following  table  shows  the  exports  of  cotton  from  the  United 
States  for  the  years  noted : 

Exports  of  cotton  from  the  United  States  to  Great  Britain  and  the  Continent  and  JFexico 
from  1S79  to  1S94,  inclusive. 


Tear. 

To  Great 
Britain. 

To  the 
Continent 

and 
Mexico. 

Total. 

Tear. 

To  the 
To  Groat  ,  Continent        „,  +  , 
Britain.             and              iotal- 
!    Mexico. 

1879-80 

1880-81 

1881-82 

1882-83 

1883-84 

1884-85 

1885-86 

1886-87 

Bales. 
2,  053,  000 
2,  554,  000 
2,  832,  000 
2,  295,  000 
2,  886,  000 
2,  485,  000 
2, 425,  000 
2,  565,  000 
2,  704,  000 

Bales. 
1, 413, 000 
1,  310,  000 
1, 733,  000 
1, 256, 000 
1,838,000 
1,432,000 
1, 495,  000 
1, 771,  000 
1,  741, 000 

Bales. 
3, 466,  000 

3,  864,  000 
4, 565,  000 
3, 551,  000 

4,  724,  000 
3,  917,  000 

3,  920,  000 

4,  336,  000 
4, 445,  000 

1887-88 

1888-89 

1889-90 

1890-91 

1891-92 

1892  93 

1893-94 

1894-95 

1 

Bales.            Bales.            Bales. 
2,814,000  !     1,813,000         4,627,000 
2,  810,  000       1,  926, 000         4,  736,  000 
2,854,000  :     2,052,000         4,906,01)0 
3,345,000  1     2,446,000         5,791,000 
3, 317,  000  '     2,  541,  000         5,  858,  000 
2,301,000  1     2,089,000  ,      4,390,000 
2,  861,  000       2,  371.  000         5,  252, 000 
3,449,000       3,279,000         6,726,000 

COTTON   IN   INDIA. 

India  ranks,  and  perhaps  always  will  rank,  next  to  the  United  States 
as  a  cotton-producing  country.  With  an  area  of  1,307,000  square  miles, 
lying  south  of  the  thirty-fifth  degree  of  north  latitude  and  wholly 
within  the  cotton  belt,  India  is  twice  the  size  of  that  part  of  the 
United  States  known  as  the  Cotton  States,  and  possesses  a  good  cotton 
soil,  although  hampered  by  an  uncertain  and  discouraging  climate. 
Bounded  on  the  east,  north,  and  west  by  mountains,  with  mountain 
chains  traversing  the  central  territory,  and  subject  to  two  periodical 
wet  seasons,  portions  of  her  territory  are  rendered  unfit  for  cotton 
growing,  either  by  excessive  rainfall,  which  in  some  sections  amounts 
to  500  inches  per  annum,  or  by  the  lack  of  moisture  in  others,  where 
the  annual  rainfall  is  scarcely  an  inch.  Although  cotton  had  been  cul- 
tivated there  for  fully  4,000  years,  the  increase  in  production  was  but 
slight  until  stimulated  by  the  diminished  supply  from  the  United  States 
between  1801  and  1865.  During  the  cotton  famine  of  this  period  the 
cultivation  was  pushed  to  its  utmost  extent,  but  when  the  United  States 
regained  its  supremacy  in  cotton  culture  the  production  of  cotton  in 
India  was  not  pressed  with  so  much  vigor.  At  present  the  attention 
of  the  ryots  has  been  turned  to  the  production  of  the  more  profitable 
indigo  and  linseed,  and  it  is  probable  that  the  production  of  cotton  will 
further  decrease.  The  average  yield  in  India  varies  in  the  different 
provinces  from  40  to  100  pounds  of  clean  cotton  per  acre,  dependent 
on  the  seasons. 

British  India,  or  Hindostan,  the  part  of  India  where  cotton  is  raised, 
embraces  four  principal  cotton  regions:  The  valley  of  the  Ganges,  the 
Deccau,  western  India,  and  southern  India. 

The  Ganges  Valley  is  again  divisible  into  two  parts,  the  Lower  Ben- 
gal district,  and  that  of  the  northwest  provinces,  including  Doab  and 
Bundelcund,  lying  on  both  sides  of  the  Ganges  and  Jumna  rivers. 

In  Lower  Bengal  the  cultivation  of  cotton  is  not  of  very  great  impor- 
tance. In  the  plains  of  Bengal,  which  are  so  fertile  in  other  produce, 
the  production  of  cotton  is  very  inconsiderable,  and  none  is  exported. 


44  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

The  cotton  raised  here  in  former  times,  though  short  in  staple,  was 
the  finest  known  in  the  world,  and  formed  the  material  out  of  which  the 
very  delicate  and  extremely  beautiful  Dacca  muslin  was  manufactured. 
This  interesting  and  indefinite  variety  of  Gossypium  kerbaceum  is  known 
as  Dacca  cotton,  and  what  little  is  raised  is  used  at  home  in  the  looms 
of  a  few  weavers  at  Bazitpore  and  Polsia  and  seldom  finds  its  way  to 
Calcutta. 

The  border  lands  of  the  Ganges  are  too  low  and  marshy  and  the  rain- 
fall too  great  for  the  successful  cultivation  of  cotton,  but  the  hills 
back  from  the  river  are  suitable  for  this  purpose,  as  they  are  better 
drained. 

The  Doab  and  Bundelcund  districts  produce  almost  the  entire  crop  of 
the  northwest  provinces,  and  furnish  about  70,000,000  pounds  of  cotton 
for  exportation,  which  is  a  good  "  India  cotton."  The  climatic  character 
of  these  districts  is  "first  a  flood  and  then  a  drought,"  with  an  inclina- 
tion to  an  insufficiency  of  rain,  in  great  contrast  to  that  of  Lower  Bengal. 

The  Deccan,  or  Central  India,  is  the  great  cotton  section  of  India. 
It  occupies  the  triangular  area  lying  south  of  the  Vindhyan  Moun- 
tains, in  latitude  23°  north,  and  extends  to  the  valley  of  the  Kistna,  at 
10°  north,  with  the  Eastern  and  Western  Ghauts  on  either  side.  It  is 
an  elevated  table-land  of  undulating  surface,  having  soil  of  great  excel- 
lence and  richness  and  of  a  consistency  to  retain  moisture  for  a  long 
ime.  Nearly  all  the  cotton  for  export  is  raised  within  this  region  and 
finds  its  market  at  Bombay. 

The  Deccan  may  be  divided  into  the  Nagpore,  Hyderabad,  Berar, 
and  Dharwar  districts. 

The  soil  in  the  valleys  of  Nagpore  is  a  rich  black  loam  which  becomes 
very  sticky  and  muddy  during  the  rainy  season  and  hard  and  cracked 
during  the  dry  season,  in  this  respect  very  much  resembling  some  of 
the  Alabama  soils.  In  the  hilly  portion  there  is  a  red  clay  soil.  The 
cotton  grown  within  this  district  is  very  fine  and  soft,  indicative  of  a 
moist  and  equable  climate,  especially  that  produced  in  the  valleys  of  the 
Wurda  and  its  tributaries.  It  is  known  commercially  as  "Hingaughat 
cotton,"  from  the  chief  town  of  that  section,  and  is  considered  as  pos- 
sessing the  highest  qualities  of  any  India  cotton. 

Hyderabad  is  a  plateau  with  a  surface  more  or  less  hilly  and  a  gen- 
eral elevation  of  2,000  feet  above  sea  level.  The  soil  between  the  hills 
is  remarkably  fertile,  and  along  the  Kistna,  Godavery,  and  Wurda 
rivers  and  their  tributaries  is  to  be  found  some  of  the  most  productive 
soil  of  India. 

Berar  is  an  elevated  valley  through  which  flow  several  large  streams 
that  enter  into  the  Godavery  and  drain  a  country  the  soil  of  which  is 
unsurpassed  in  richness  and  depth  and  adaptability  to  the  cultivation  of 
cotton.  From  this  section  comes  the  cotton  known  as  "  Oomrawattee," 
or  Oomras. 

Dharwar  is  another  good  cotton  district,  being  especially  suited  to 
the   acclimatizing  and  culture  of  American  cotton.     The  extent  of 


HISTORY    AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  45 

territory  is  small,  but  being  near  the  sea  and  possessing  a  tolerable 
uniformity  of  atmospheric  moisture,  the  combination  of  climate  and 
soil  is  better  adjusted  for  the  production  of  cotton  than  any  other  part 
of  the  Deccan,  and  consequently  than  any  other  region  of  India. 

Western  India  is  of  no  special  interest  in  this  connection,  not  being 
a  heavy  producer  of  cotton  except  in  the  provinces  of  Scinde,  Cutch, 
and  Guzerat.  The  soil  of  these  provinces  varies  in  richness  and  pro- 
ductiveness from  sand  to  deep  black  alluvium.  The  greatest  drawback 
to  the  cultivation  of  cotton  in  this  region  is  the  extreme  heat  and  the 
drought  succeeding  a  rainy  season  of  small  precipitation — 3  to  10 
inches  in  Scinde  and  Cutch,  though  parts  of  Guzerat  have  a  yearly 
fall  of  40  inches. 

Southern  India,  or  the  southern  part  of  the  Madras  Presidency,  is 
best  represented  in  cotton  culture  by  the  provinces  of  Coimbatore  and 
Tinnevelly,  which  border  on  the  Western  Ghauts,  where  the  atmos- 
phere is  humid.  The  cotton  raised  in  the  latter  province  is  the  best 
grown  in  southern  India. 

Although  India  has  always  produced  large  quantities  of  cotton,  and 
made  most  beautiful  and  delicate  webs  from  its  fiber,  exporting  these 
fabrics  to  all  parts  of  the  world,  it  is  only  within  the  past  one  hundred 
years  that  she  has  exported  any  considerable  quantity  of  raw  cotton. 

The  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States  in  1836  esti- 
mated the  cotton  crop  of  India  for  1801  at  400,000  bales  of  400  pounds 
each;  but  of  this  amount,  according  to  Watt  and  Murray,1  "■the  imports 
into  Great  Britain  from  India  during  the  years  1800  to  1809  averaged 
12,700  bales  per  annum,"  and  "in  1818  the  export  to  the  United  King- 
dom amounted  to  247,000  bales — the  largest  quantity  exported  from 
India  up  to  1833— but  in  1821  had  fallen  to  20,000  bales." 

The  estimated  yield  of  cotton  in  India  for  1834  was  463,000  bales  of 
400  pounds  each,  showing  but  a  slight  increase  over  the  production  in 
1801,  and  indicating  that  the  increased  exportation  from  that  country 
was  at  the  expense  of  home  consumption,  caused  by  some  falling  off  of 
the  American  crop  and  not  an  equal  increase  in  production. 

"The  final  result  of  the  contest  between  America  and  India  in  cotton 
supply,"  says  Watt,  "is  too  well  known  to  require  any  recapitulation. 
America  had  gained  command  of  the  market,  and  India  was  considered 
only  as  a  supplementary  source  of  supply,  resorted  to  mainly  in  the 
event  of  a  short  crop  in  the  West." 

The  following  table  gives  the  production  of  cotton  in  India  from  I860 
to  1894: 


Production  of  cotton  in  India,  by 

periods  (in  bales  of  400  pounds). 

Tear. 

• 

Bales. 

Year. 

Bales. 

1869  70 

1,  985, 000 

1891    92 

2, 795,  000 

1880  81 

2,093,000      1892  93 

3,225,000       1893  94 

2, 902,  000 

1890-91 

2, 993, 000 

1Watt,  Dictionary  of  Economic  Products  of  India,  IV,  p.  48. 


46 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


Important  and  interesting  as  are  the  Indian  manufactures  of  cotton 
it  is  impossible  in  this  publication  to  do  more  than  briefly  sketch  their 
progress.  The  total  number  of  hand  looms  in  the  country  and  the 
amount  of  raw  material  they  consume  are  quite  large,  but  it  is  impossi- 
ble to  give  accurate  figures  for  either.  As  the  power  mills  of  India 
increased  and  importation  of  foreign  goods  was  augmented,  the  finer 
fabrics  of  the  hand  loom,  such  as  Dacca  muslin,  once  so  famous  all  over 
the  world,  ceased  to  be  produced,  until  now  they  are  rarely  seen,  and 
the  present  generation  of  weavers,  from  lack  of  demand  for  their  prod- 
uct, have  almost  lost  the  art  which,  transmitted  from  father  to  son  for 
4,000  years,  had  placed  them  easily  first  among  the  weavers  of  the  world. 

The  first  mill  built  in  India  was  opened  for  business  at  Bombay  in  1854. 
This  was  followed  by  another  in  1855,  and  by  a  third  in  1857.  In  1861 
there  were  12,  with  338,000  spindles  and  an  estimated  annual  consump- 
tion of  05,000  bales  of  390  pounds  to  the  bale.1 

In  1879,  twenty-five  years  after  the  erection  of  the  first  mill,  the 
number  had  increased  to  56,  with  1,500,000  spindles. 

In  1889  there  were  124  mills,  working  21,600  looms,  2,703,000  spindles, 
employing  91,600  hands,  and  consuming  888,700  bales  of  raw  cotton. 
Three-fourths  of  this  consumption  was  by  mills  in  Bombay  Presidency; 
Bengal  Presidency  being  second,  using  85,000  bales,  and  Madras  Presi- 
dency third,  working  up  43,750  bales. 

In  1893-94  India  mills  took  1,222,000  bales  of  400  pounds  net  for  con- 
sumption, about  41  per  cent  of  her  crop.  The  amount  used  outside  of 
the  mills  was  sufficient  to  bring  the  total  home  consumption  up  to  a 
little  over  50  per  cent  of  the  crop  for  that  year.  India  is  also  a  large 
buyer  of  cotton  yarns  and  cloth,  as  in  1892  she  imported  50,404,318 
pounds  of  cotton  yarn  and  twist,  valued  at  $6,380,000,  and  cotton 
manufactures  valued  at  $52,867,000. 

India  less  than  twenty-five  years  ago  took  1£  per  cent  of  all  cotton 
grown  and  now  consumes  10  per  cent. 

The  growth  of  cotton  manufacture  in  India  since  1861  is  shown  by 

the  following  statistics : 

Cotton  mills  of  India, 

[Compiled  by  tbe  secretary  of  the  subcommittee  from  the  annual  reports  of  the  Bombay  Mill  Owners' 

Association.  1 


Tear  ending 
June  30— 

Num- 
ber of 
mills. 

Number  of 
spindles. 

Estimated 
annual  con- 
sumption 
(iu  bales  of 
392  lbs.). 

Tear  ending 
June  30— 

Num- 
ber of 
mills. 

Number  of 
spindles. 

Estimated 
annual  con- 
sumption 
(in  bales  of 
392  lbs.). 

1861 

12 
27 
40 
47 
51 
53 
56 
56 
57 
65 
67 
79 

338,  000 
593,  000 
886,  000 
1, 100, 112 
1,  244,  206 
1,  289,  706 
1,  452,  794 
1,  461,  590 

1,  513,  096 
1,620,814 
1, 790,  388 

2,  001,  667 

65,  000 
114, 000 
170,  000 
198,  000 
215,  000 
225,  000 
267,  585 
307,631 
378,  989 
397,  562 
456,  556 
531,  365 

1885 

87 
95 
103 
114 
124 
137 
134 
139 
141 
142 
148 

2, 145,  646 
2,  261,  561 
2,421,290 
2,  488,  851 

2,  762,  518 

3,  274,  000 
3,  352,  000 
3, 402,  000 
3,  576,  000 
3,  650,  000 
3,  810,  000 

596,  749 
643,  204 

1874 

1886 

1875 

1887 

726,  276 

1876 

1888 

786,  982 
888,  654 

1877 

1889 

1890 

1891 

1878 

1,  008,  000 

1879 

1,179,000 

1880 

1892 

1, 166,  000 
1, 122,  000 

1881 

1893 .'. 

1882 

1894 

1, 140,  000 
1,  342,  000 

1883 

1895 

1884 

About  125,000  persons  are  now  employed  in  the  mills. 

1  Watt,  Dictionary  of  Economic  Products  of  India,  IV,  p.  158. 


HISTORY   AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON. 


47 


COTTON  IN  EGYPT. 

From  time  immemorial  a  fine  quality  of  cotton  has  been  grown  in 
tlie  upper  regions  of  the  Nile,  particularly  in  Abyssinia.  Seed  of  this 
variety  was  brought  to  Lower  Egypt  about  1820,  and  from  about  this 
date  Egypt  has  been  a  regular  exporter  of  cotton  to  European  markets. 
From  1821  to  1856  the  quantity  varied  from  15,000,000  to  50,000,000 
pounds  annually;  but  Egypt  felt  the  stimulus  of  the  cotton  famine  of 
1S61-1865,  which  caused  all  cotton-growing  countries  to  increase  their 
yield. 

In  1800  the  export  duty  of  10  per  cent  levied  by  the  Government  had 
been  reduced  to  1  per  cent,  and  this  also  stimulated  the  culture,  aud 
the  annual  average  export  for  the  decade  1861-1870  was  310,000  bales 
of  100  pounds  each.  Unlike  other  cot  ton- growing  countries,  Egypt  did 
not  reduce  its  cotton  production  upon  the  resumption  of  shipments 
from  America,  but  has  steadily  increased  its  output,  as  will  be  seen  from 
the  following  table : 

Exxmrts  of  cotton  from  Egypt  to  Europe  and  the  United  Kingdom. 


Tear. 

Bales. 

Tear. 

Bales. 

Tear. 

Bales. 

1874 

410,  000 
347,  000 
472. 000 
438,  000 
400,  000 
255,  000 
456,  000 
405,  000 

1882 

423,  000 
329.  000 
384.000 
500,  000 
410,  000 
418,000 
411,000 

1889 

388,  000 
433,  000 

1875 

1883 

1884 

1885 

1886 

1890 

1876 

1891.  . 

538  000 

1877 

1892 

e^o  000 

1878 

1893 

678,  000 

1879 

1887 

1894 

664,  001) 

1880 

1888 

1895 

634,  000 

1881 

According  to  Foaden1  the  present  production  in  Egypt  is  about 
577,500,000  pounds  of  fiber,  practically  the  whole  of  which  is  exported; 
and  22,275,000  bushels  of  seed,  of  which  the  greater  part  is  exported. 

Extensive  irrigation  and  drainage  systems  are  in  course  of  construc- 
tion which  will  doubtless  greatly  increase  the  area  of  cotton  culture. 
Moreover,  other  crops  are  being  abandoned  to  some  extent  and  cotton 
substituted  for  them. 

Mako-Jumel,  the  name  given  the  variety  of  cotton  first  cultivated 
experienced  many  changes  and  evolutions  in  Egypt,  gradually  chang- 
ing its  color  to  a  yellowish  brown,  and  this  new  variety  was  known 
as  Ashmouni,  from  the  valley  of  Ashmoun,  where  this  change  was 
first  noted.  The  principal  varieties  of  Egyptian  cotton  are  the  Ash- 
mouni, Mitafifi,  Bamia,  Abbasi,  and  Gallini.  For  many  years  the 
Ashmouni  formed  the  bulk  of  the  Egyptian  crop,  but  it  is  now  almost 
entirely  superseded  by  the  Mitafifi.  In  color  it  is  a  lightish  brown 
and  its  staple  is  over  an  inch  in  length.  Its  cultivation  is  continued 
in  some  parts  of  Egypt,  but  the  acreage  of  this  variety  is  decreasing 
every  year.  In  Upper  Egypt,  however,  it  is  more  extensively  culti- 
vated, the  soil  there  being  less  favorable  to  Mitafifi. 


1  Foaden,  MS.  article  on  cotton  culture  in  Egypt,  iu  the  possession  of  this  Office. 


48  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

The  Mitafifi  cotton  was  discovered  by  a  Greek  merchant  in  the  vil- 
lage of  that  name.  The  seed  has  a  bluish-green  tuft  at  the  extremity, 
which  attracted  the  merchant's  attention,  and  on  planting  it  he  found 
that  it  possessed  decided  advantage  over  the  old  Ashmouni.  It  is  more 
hardy  and  also  yields  a  greater  proportion  of  lint  to  the  seed.  At  first 
from  315  pounds  of  seed  cotton  112  pounds  of  lint  was  secured,  and 
sometimes  even  more.  It  is  now  somewhat  deteriorated  and  rarely 
yields  so  much,  averaging  about  106  pounds  of  lint  to  315  of  seed  cot- 
ton. The  Mitafifi  is  a  richer  and  darker  brown  than  the  Ashmouni. 
The  fiber  is  long,  very  strong,  and  fine  to  the  touch,  and  is  in  great 
demand.     In  fact  it  controls  the  market. 

Next  to  Mitafifi,  Bamia  is  perhaps  the  most  extensively  cultivated 
variety  in  Lower  Egypt.  It  was  discovered  by  a  Copt  in  1873.  The 
plant  is  of  large  size  and  coarse  growth.  It  is  later  and  less  hardy 
than  Mitafifi,  and  the  fiber  is  poor  as  compared  with  that  of  Mitafifi 
and  Abbasi,  light  brown  in  color,  and  not  very  strong.  In  general  it 
may  be  said  that  this  variety  is  inferior  to  Mitafifi  in  yield,  hardiness, 
and  length  and  strength  of  fiber. 

Abbasi  is  a  variety  of  recent  introduction  and  is  not  yet  very  exten- 
sively grown.  It  was  derived  from  the  Mitafifi  through  the  Zafiri.  It 
resembles  Mitafifi,  but  is  somewhat  earlier.  "The  lint  is  of  a  beauti- 
ful white  color,  fine,  silky,  very  long,  though  not  so  strong  as  Mitafifi, 
and  the  first  two  pickings  command  the  highest  price  in  the  market."1 

The  Gallini  cotton,  derived  from  Sea  Island  and  closely  resembling 
it,  has  almost  entirely  disappeared  from  cultivation,  as  the  quality  has 
deteriorated  to  such  an  extent  that  it  is  difficult  to  sell.  In  1891  only 
122  cantars  (less  than  20  bales)  were  on  the  market,  and  they  were  not 
readily  sold. 

Among  other  varieties  may  be  named  Hamouli,  of  a  good  mellow 
brown  color,  not  so  long  in  staple  as  the  Mitafifi,  but  producing  a  good 
I>roportion  of  lint 

From  1879  to  1894,  on  the  State  domains,  the  average  yield  per  acre 
was  425  pounds,  valued  at  $42.59  per  acre;  from  1890  to  1894,  inclusive, 
the  yield  of  cotton  gave  on  an  average  $43.14  per  acre.  During  the  three 
years  1892, 1893,  and  1894  the  money  yield,  including  value  of  cotton 
seed,  lint,  and  wood  (stubble),  has  averaged  $52  per  acre.  The  cotton 
seed  brings  about  $4.50  per  acre.  The  wood  is  valued  at  about  $2.50 
per  acre,  being  used  as  fuel. 

Foaden  gives  the  following  estimate  of  the  present  cost  of  growing 
an  acre  of  cotton  in  Egypt: 

Cost  per  acre  of  (/rowing  cotton  in  Egypt. 

Kent  of  land,  including  taxes $27.  00 

Irrigation 7.  00 

Preparation  of  land,  seeding,  manuring,  etc 5.  50 

Cost  of  seed 50 

Cultivation,  including  hoeing,  thinning,  etc 2. 00 

Picking 4.  00 

Total 46.00 

1  Foaden,  loc.  cit. 


HISTORY    AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON. 


49 


The  return  from  lint,  seed,  etc.,  is  stated  by  him  to  be  $66,  thus 
yielding  a  profit  of  $20  per  acre. 

A  small  Arab  farmer  who  works  his  crop  with  his  family  can  produce 
cotton  much  cheaper.  The  average  yield  of  lint  cotton  per  acre  is  340 
pounds,  but  good  lands  produce  700.1 

The  cotton  gins  in  use  in  Egypt  are  of  the  roller  pattern,  there  being 
about  100  ginning  mills  in  the  country,  distributed  in  all  the  chief 
cotton  centers.  There  are  also  hydraulic  presses  attached  to  nearly  all 
the  mills,  so  that  the  cotton  comes  to  Alexandria,  the  shipping  point, 
hydraulically  pressed.  There  are  but  few  steam  press  mills  in  the 
country,  so  that  the  great  business  of  preparing  for  exportation  is  con- 
fined to  Alexandria. 

The  Egyptian  cotton  is  put  up  in  close,  compact,  tough  covering.  The 
bales,  which  are  long  and  smooth,  weigh  from  700  to  780  pounds,  occupy 
from  15  to  20  cubic  feet  each,  are  plainly  marked,  and  are  wrapped  close 
and  bound  strong  and  tight.  Being  so  well  covered  and  bound,  injury 
from  fire,  water,  dirt,  and  dust  is  minimized.  Ships  which  can  pack 
10,000  or  12,000  bales  of  Egyptian  cotton  can  take  only  from  6,000  to 
8,000  bales  of  American  cotton,  although,  according  to  the  ratio  of 
weights,  they  should  take  14,000  bales.  As  it  is,  the  cost  of  freighting 
is  much  heavier  for  American  cotton  per  pound  than  for  the  Egyptian, 
and  there  is  much  waste  in  unnecessary  packing  material,  and  loss 
by  dirt,  mud,  and  bursting  of  bales,  which  affect  about  equally  the 
producer  and  the  manufacturer. 

Egyptian  cotton  is  not  as  fine  as  Sea  Island  cotton,  and  of  course 
does  not  bring  so  high  a  price,  but  is  better  than  American  upland 
cotton  for  goods  requiring  smooth  finish  and  high  luster.  It  gives  to 
fabrics  a  soft  finish  somewhat  like  silk.  It  has  a  strong,  silky  staple 
from  1£  to  If  inches  in  length. 

The  imports  of  Egyptian  cotton  into  the  United  States  for  the  sea- 
sons ending  August  31  were  at  different  periods  as  follows: 

Imports  of  Egyptian  cotton  into  the  United  States. 


Tear. 

Bales. 

Tear. 

Bales. 

1884-85 

4,553 
3,815 
4,700 
5,792 
8,430 
10,  470 

1890  91 

23,  790 

1885-86 

1891   92 

27,  739 

1886  87 

1892  93 

42, 475 

1887-88 

1893  94 

33,  606 

1888-89 

1894  95 

59,  418 

1889-90 

| 

COTTON   IN   BRAZIL.2 

The  consensus  of   the  early  historians  of  Brazil  is  that  cotton  is 
indigenous  to  that  country,  and  that  while  the  natives  probably  did  not 

'See  also  article  on  culture  of  cotton. 

2  The  principal  authority  upon  which  this  account  rests  is  Branner,  Cotton  in  the 
Empire  of  Brazil,  U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Special  Report  No.  8,  1885. 
1993— No.  33 4 


50  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

plant  it  they  made  use  of  the  fruit  of  the  wild  plant  to  supply  their 
few  and  simple  needs  for  clothing  and  other  textile  products. 

Beauchamp, l  treating  of  the  period  immediately  following  the  dis- 
covery (1500  to  1521),  refers  to  cotton  cords  used  by  the  Indians  of 
Brazil  upon  their  bows  and  for  other  purposes.  Visconde  de  Porto 
Seguro,2  in  describing  the  customs  and  utensils  of  the  ancient  inhabit- 
ants of  the  Upper  Amazon  Valley,  says :  "They  made  use  of  blowguns, 
the  arrows  of  which  were  wrapped  with  cotton."  Auguste  de  Saint- 
Hilaire,3  one  of  the  most  trustworthy  authorities  and  careful  observers 
who  have  traveled  in  Brazil,  says  that  the  earliest  travelers  found  cot- 
ton in  use  among  Indians  along  the  Brazilian  coast;  that  they  used  it 
for  making  cords,  hammocks,  and  even  clothing,  giving  as  one  author- 
ity for  this  statement  Hans  Stade,  who  was  held  in  captivity  in  south- 
eastern Brazil  from  1547  to  1555.  Abundant  evidence  of  the  fact  that 
cotton  was  used  by  the  Indians  at  the  time  of  the  discovery  of  the 
country  is  furnished  by  the  oldest  documents  upon  Brazil  referring  to 
that  event,  and  by  the  letters  of  the  Jesuit  missionaries  who  immedi- 
ately undertook  to  Christianize  the  Indians.  Also  the  existence  among 
the  aborigines  of  words  signifying  cotton  points  to  their  knowledge  of 
cotton,  and  very  probably  to  some  of  its  uses.  Nearly  all  of  these 
words  appear  to  be  the  same,  or  at  least  have  the  same  origin.  The 
slight  differences  that  exist  are  probably  caused  by  the  differences  in 
the  dialects  spoken  by  the  various  tribes  of  the  Indians,  or  may  be 
attributable  to  the  differences  among  the  observers  and  the  different 
nationalities  of  the  observers.  One  remarkable  thing  about  these  terms 
is  that  none  of  them  bear  any  resemblance  to  the  European  words 
for  cotton. 

Gabriel  Soares  de  Souza,  who  lived  in  what  is  now  the  province  of 
Bahia  from  1570  to  1587,  describes  in  detail  some  of  the  Indians  then 
inhabiting  that  part  of  Brazil.  "  It  is  customary  for  the  men,'f  he  says,4 
"to  wear  their  hair  so  long  that  it  reaches  their  waist,  and  sometimes 
they  have  it  braided  and  intertwined  with  strips  of  cotton,  so  that  it 
looks  like  a  broad  braid.  The  women  are  close  shaven  and  wear  about 
themselves  aprons  made  of  cotton  thread,  with  a  long  fringe." 

Claude  d' Abbeville,  a  Capuchin  missionary  in  Marauhao  from  1612  to 
1614,  also  reports  the  natives  of  that  country  as  using  cotton  ham- 
mocks.    In  another  place  he  says:5 

They  gather,  clean,  beat,  and  spin  cotton  with  much  dexterity,  and  with  it  make 
open  hammocks  resembling  nets,  and  others  as  well  woven  and  full  of  figures  as  if 
they  were  the  work  of  better  weavers;  also  aprons  in  which  they  carry  their  chil- 
dren about  their  necks. 

1  Histoire  du  Bre"sil,  Vol.  I,  pp.  93,  96. 

'2Historia  Geral  du  Brazil,  Vol.  I,  p.  30. 

3  Voyage  daus  le  District  des  Diamans,  pp.  253,  254. 

4Revista  do  Instituto  Historico  do  Brazil,  p.  352. 

6Historia  do  Marauhao,  p.  356. 


HISTORY   AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  51 

In  1570  to  1587  De  Souza  wrote  of  the  cotton  plant  in  Bahia:  "These 
cotton  plants  are  cleaned  with  the  hoe  two  or  three  times  during  the 
year  to  keep  the  weeds  from  choking  them." 

Notwithstanding  the  general  cultivation  of  cotton  throughout  Brazil, 
there  is  no  record  of  its  having  been  exported  to  any  great  extent,  and 
but  little  evidence  of  its  being  exported  at  all,  until  the  middle  of  the 
seventeenth  century. 

Marques1  says  that  after  the  formation  of  the  commercial  company  of 
Maranhao  and  Gram-Para  the  first  exportation  of  cotton  took  place  in 
1760,  which  consisted  of  651  arrobas,  or  20,831  pounds.  Camara  says, 
in  a  memorial  upon  the  cultivation  of  cotton  published  in  1719  in  Lis- 
bon, that  cotton  was  first  sent  from  Pernambuco  to  Portugal  in*  1778, 
and  that  up  to  1781  the  quantity  shipped  was  very  small. 

J.  B.  Lyman2  says  that  the  export  of  cotton  from  Brazil  to  England 
began  in  1781. 

A  commission 3  appointed  by  the  Government  in  1852  to  revise  the 
tariff  made  the  following  report  regarding  the  early  exportation  of 
cotton : 

In  some  parts  of  Brazil  in  remote  times  there  was  no  exportation  of  cotton — the 
cultivation  was  limited  to  what  was  necessary  for  use  in  that  country.  It  was  from 
Parahyba  that  it  was  first  exported,  whence  it  was  sent  to  Portugal.  Pernambuco 
was  given  up  for  a  long  time  to  the  production  of  sugar,  aud  it  was  ouly  in  1778  that 
it  exported  this  article  for  the  first  time.  Its  exportation,  however,  was  very  small 
until  1781. 

Some  side  light  is  thrown  on  this  subject  in  the  story  of  the  ship- 
wreck of  Jorge  de  Albuquerque  Coelho.4  His  vessel  left  Pernambuco 
on  the  16th  of  May,  1565.  On  account  of  the  condition  of  the  vessel, 
they  put  back  to  port,  and  left  again  on  the  29th  of  June,  1565.  Their 
passage  was  a  stormy  one,  and  the  sea  became  so  rough  at  one  time  that 
they  were  obliged  to  throw  over  part  of  their  cargo.  The  following  is 
an  extract  from  their  report:  "And  seeing  that  all  this  was  of  no  avail, 
and  the  winds  grew  higher,  as  if  they  wished  to  overwhelm  us,  we  threw 
overboard  the  artillery,  many  boxes  of  sugar,  and  many  bales  of  cotton." 
Now,  this  vessel  was  loaded  in  the  province  of  Pernambuco,  and  the 
many  boxes  of  sugar  and  bales  of  cotton  must  have  been  grown  by 
the  Portuguese  within  this  province. 

By  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century  the  cultivation  of  cotton  had 
become  general  throughout  almost  the  whole  of  Brazil,  aud  consid- 
erable quantities  were  being  exported  to  Europe.  During  the  eight- 
eenth century  the  more  general  use  of  gold  as  a  circulating  medium, 
the  removal  of  prohibitory  laws,  and  the  increased  demand  for  raw 

'Marques,  Dictionary  of  the  Province  of  Maranhao,  p.  13. 

-J.  B.  Lyman,  Cotton  Culture,  p.  153. 

3Relatorio  da  Commissao  da  Revisao  da  Tarifa  ao  Governo  Imperial,  1853. 

4Revista  do  Institute  Historico  do  Brazil,  p.  279  et  seq. 


52  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

material  in  Europe  led  to  what  was  for  those  times  an  extensive  culti- 
vation and  exportation. 

The  only  statistics  to  be  obtained  up  to  the  end  of  the  eighteenth 
century  are  those  of  the  province  of  Maranhao.  From  these  we  find 
that  in  1800  5,529,408  pounds  were  exported,  but  this  port  stood  only 
second  among  the  cotton-exporting  ports.  Pernambuco  probably  ex- 
ported twice  as  much,  while  Bahia,  Rio  de  Janeiro,  and  Para  together 
exported  as  much  as  Maranhao.  Visconde  de  Porto  Seguro  says  that 
70,000  bags  of  cotton,  1G5  pounds  to  the  bag,  were  exported,  of  which 
40,000  were  from  Pernambuco,  16,000  from  Maranhao,  10,000  from  Bahia, 
and  4,000  from  Para  and  Rio;  and  in  another  place  he  says  that  Ceara 
exported  40,000  sacks. 

Upon  the  arrival  of  representatives  of  the  royal  family  of  Portugal 
(April,  1808)  Brazil  ceased  to  be  a  mere  colony,  and  a  new  impetus  was 
given  to  this  as  well  as  to  the  other  industries.  Ports  were  made  free 
to  friendly  foreign  powers,  and  the  decree  prohibiting  the  use  of  looms 
for  other  than  the  coarsest  kinds  of  cotton  was  revoked.  Cotton  had 
now  become  a  regular  and  constantly  increasing  article  of  exportation, 
being  in  such  demand  and  commanding  such  prices  that  it  was  brought 
from  great  distances  inland  on  the  backs  of  mules  and  horses  and  over 
almost  impassable  roads. 

Such  was  the  condition  of  the  cotton  industry  in  Brazil  at  the  time 
the  United  States  entered  the  market  as  a  cotton  producer,  and  the 
effect  of  her  rivalry  in  one  of  the  most  important  branches  of  agri- 
culture was  very  disastrous  to  cotton  production  in  Brazil. 

The  territory  of  Brazil  capable  of  yielding  cotton  is  coextensive  with 
the  Empire  itself.  Cotton  grows  in  almost  every  one  of  the  provinces, 
and  in  regard  to  the  others  there  exists  little  doubt  of  its  adaptability 
to  this  plant. 

Various  authors  mention  cotton  as  grown  on  the  Tapajos  and  the 
Madeira  rivers.  From  Sao  Paulo  all  along  the  coast  to  the  Amazon, 
and  for  that  matter  throughout  the  whole  Empire,  cotton  may  be  grown 
in  almost  unlimited  quantities.  In  reality,  however,  its  cultivation  to 
a  considerable  extent  is  limited  to  the  drier  regions  of  the  north,  along 
the  valley  of  the  River  Sao  Francisco,  and  in  some  parts  of  the  prov- 
ince of  Minas  Geraes.  In  the  north — that  is,  to  the  north  of  Sergipe — 
a  belt  about  50  miles  wide  along  the  coast  is  for  the  most  x^art  devoted 
to  sugar.  Immediately  beyond  this  is  the  region  in  which  cotton  is 
actually  grown.  The  width  of  this  cotton  belt  is  restricted  by  inade- 
quate transportation  facilities.  Transportation  is  principally  on  the 
backs  of  horses,  and  the  railways  are  as  yet  too  few  to  influence  the 
amount  of  cotton  produced. 

As  a  rule,  it  may  be  said  that  the  cotton  belt  in  the  north  begins  at 
the  edge  of  the  sugar  belt,  50  miles  inland,  and  extends  about  200 
miles  inland,  more  or  less,  to  the  south ;  as  it  approaches  the  province 
of  Bahia  it  extends  inland,  and  keeps  mainly  within  the  region  drained 


HISTORY   AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  53 

by  the  Eio  Sao  Francisco.  In  the  more  southern  provinces,  from  Espi- 
rito  Santo  and  Eio  de  Janeiro,  the  amount  of  cotton  produced  at  pres- 
ent for  exportation  is  insignificant.  Formerly,  especially  during-  the 
prevalence  of  the  high  prices  caused  by  the  civil  war  in  the  United 
States,  cotton  was  grown  in  some  of  these  southern  provinces  for 
exportation,  especially  Eio  de  Janeiro  and  Sao  Paulo. 

The  island  of  Fernando  de  Noronha  is  an  exception  to  the  statement 
that  the  cotton  is  all  grown  inland.  During  the  civil  war  in  the 
United  States  and  for  some  time  afterwards  the  finest  cotton  sent  from 
any  part  of  Brazil  was  grown  on  this  island,  and  was  comparable  with 
the  Sea  Island  cotton,  possibly  fully  its  equal.  But  though  efforts  are 
being  made  to  renew  the  cotton  culture  on  the  island,  which  went  into 
decline  in  1870  or  thereabouts,  the  success  has  not  been  very  great. 
The  soil  is  remarkably  fertile  and  the  island  is  one  of  the  best  culti- 
vated pieces  of  soil  in  Brazil. 

It  must  not  be  supposed  that  only  native  species  are  grown,  or,  indeed, 
that  any  of  the  kinds  commonly  cultivated  are  native,  though  it  is  pos- 
sible that  one  of  the  species  supposed  by  some  authors  to  be  exotic  is 
indigenous  to  South  America.  Planters  seem  to  know  of  but  three 
kinds,  and  even  in  these  the  differences  are  not  always  persistent.  As 
a  rule,  the  varieties  are  larger  than  ordinary  cotton,  and  some  of  them 
are  perennial. 

None  of  these  varieties  of  cotton  produce  more  than  one  crop  per 
annum,  many  assertions  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding.  The  even 
temperature  throughout  the  year  and  the  favorable  weather  lengthen 
out  the  picking  time  to  several  weeks  and  even  months,  and  it  is  possi- 
ble that  those  who  state  that  there  are  two  or  more  crops  in  a  year  mis- 
take the  various  pickings  for  successive  crops. 

Sea  Island  cotton  has  been  introduced  in  Brazil,  but  without  success. 
The  complaint  that  Brazilian  cotton  is  dirty  is  not  due  to  any  quality 
of  the  cotton,  but,  like  the  Indian  cotton,  to  the  manner  in  which  it  is 
picked,  cleaned,  and  handled. 

In  the  Eoteiro  do  Brazil  a  writer  puts  in  a  few  words  the  process 
of  cultivation  in  use  in  Bahia  in  its  early  history,  and  probably  in  all 
Brazil,  as  follows : 

These  cotton  trees  last  seven  and  eight  years  and  more  if  the  ends  of  the  large 
branches  are  broken  off  (for  they  dry  up),  in  order  that  they  put  forth  other  new  and 
more  vigorous  ones.  These  cotton  plants  are  cleared  with  the  hoe  two  or  three  times 
a  year  to  keep  the  grass  from  crowding  them. 

In  the  preparation  of  the  soil  "all  the  planter  has  to  do  is  to  burn  off 
the  woods  and  plant  his  seed  at  the  proper  season."  This  is  the  whole 
story.  There  is  no  uprooting  of  stumps,  no  picking  out  of  sprouts,  no 
breaking  up  with  a  plow,  no  preparation  of  soil,  no  laying  out  of  furrow, 
no  cultivation-  other  than  the  occasional  chopping  out  with  the  hoe 
of  weeds  or  sprouts.  Therefore  it  is  evident  that  the  cultivation  of 
cotton  is  almost  without  labor;  in  fact,  Auguste  de  Saiut-Hilaire  says: 


54  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

"iNotliing  in  this  country  is  less  expeusive  or  more  productive  than 
cotton  culture." 

In  some  sections  the  saw  gin  is  used,  though  it  has  been  found  by 
experience  to  injure  greatly  the  fiber  of  the  Brazilian  staple,  and  the 
common  hand-roller  gin  is  more  frequently  used.  In  connection  with 
the  gins  there  are  rude  presses,  where  the  cotton  is  made  into  bales  of 
about  385  pounds.  A  hand  screw  is  the  power  used  in  this  baling 
machine.  Generally  the  seed  are  not  turned  to  account.  In  a  few 
instances,  near  the  seaport,  they  have  been  shipped  to  England,  or 
where  steam  engines  are  used  for  baling  or  ginning  they  are  some- 
times used  as  fuel.  The  greater  part,  however,  is  left  to  rot  upon  the 
ground  or  to  be  eaten  by  the  cattle  in  the  neighborhood.  Only  occa- 
sionally are  they  used  as  manure. 

The  home  consumption  of  cotton  is  very  large  and  is  increasing. 
This  is  because  of  the  difficulty  of  getting  the  raw  material  to  market 
from  remote  points,  the  evenness  of  the  temperature,  which  does  not 
require  warm  clothing,  and  the  high  tariff  upon  foreign  manufactured 
goods.  Much  of  this  manufacturing  is  done  in  the  homes  of  planters, 
there  being  comparatively  few  manufacturing  establishments  in  the 
country. 

These  establishments  are  mostly  in  the  provinces  of  Eio  de  Janeiro, 
Minas  Geraes,  Sao  Paulo,  and  Bahia,  where  the  demands  for  ordinary 
grades  of  coarse  cotton  cloth  are  greatest,  but  they  by  no  means  have 
done  away  with  domestic  consumption  of  the  raw  material.  There  is  no 
more  familiar  sight  to  the  traveler  in  the  interior  of  Brazil  than  that  of 
spinning  with  the  ancient  distaff  and  spindle.  Brazil  undoubtedly 
weaves  many  thousand  pounds  of  her  cotton  annually  in  that  way.    , 

The  amount  of  cotton  produced  in  Brazil  in  1859-60  was  70,000 
bales;  in  1893-91, 300,000  bales.  The  amount  manufactured  in  1859-60 
was  10,000  bales;  in  1893-94,  100,000  bales. 

Brazil  exports  about  150,000  bales  of  400  pounds  each  to  Europe, 
most  of  which  goes  directly  to  England;  and  should  there  be  a  demand 
sufficient  to  justify  the  planters  to  increase  their  acreage,  the  crop 
could  be  increased  many- fold — in  fact,  there  is  sufficient  good  and 
available  land  to  produce  40,000,000  bales,  at  a  yield  of  only  100  pounds 
of  lint  per  acre.  As  population  increases  and  railroads  are  extended 
the  cotton  crop  of  Brazil  may  be  expected  to  increase  commensurately. 

COTTON  IN  RUSSIA. 

The  Russian  cotton-raising  district  lies  in  her  Asiatic  territory,  in 
Turkestan  and  Transcaucasia.  Russian  Turkestan  is  bounded  on  the 
west  by  the  Caspian  Sea,  Ural  River  and  Mountains,  on  the  east  by 
the  Pamir  Plateau,  Tian-Shan  and  Altai  ranges,  on  the  north  by  the 
Kirghiz  steppes,  and  on  the  south  by  Afghanistan  and  Persia.  West- 
ern Turkestan  is  commonly  supposed  to  consist  of  vast  low-lying  sandy 
plains,  but  nothing  could  be  more  opposed  to  the  actual  conditions,  for 


HISTORY    AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  55 

the  relief  of  the  laud  here  presents  greater  contrasts  than  are  else- 
where found  on  the  surface  of  the  globe. 

The  lowlands  bordering  the  Caspian  Sea  are  sometimes  as  much  as 
SO  feet  below  the  sea  level,  while  the  highlands  of  the  Tian-Shan  peaks 
rise  25,000  feet  above  the  sea.  The  Aralo-Caspian  basin  is  watered  by 
the  rivers  Amu-Daria,  Zerafshan,  Murghab,  and  Syr-Daria. 

The  low-lying  and  level  parts  of  Turkestan  are  covered  with  marine 
and  lacustrine  deposits  of  geological  epochs  preceding  the  present 
one.  Here  are  found  conglomerates,  sands,  and  porous  or  loose  soils. 
These  recent  deposits  are  well  adapted  for  cotton  growing. 

In  this  district  cotton  has  been  cultivated  from  most  ancient  times. 
In  all  probability  this  culture  began  at  the  time  when  the  Asiatic  cot- 
ton plant  (Gossypium  herbaceum)  began  to  develop  on  the  borders  of 
the  Oxus  (Amu-Daria)  and  Seikhoun  (Syr-Daria),  to  which  it  had  been 
brought  from  southern  Asia.  After  the  plant  became  acclimated  in 
that  northern  latitude  several  new  varieties  were  produced,  and  its  cul- 
tivation contributed  much  to  the  welfare  of  the  inhabitants,  who  pro- 
duced sufficient  for  their  own  use  and  exported  some  to  neighboring 
countries.  During  this  time  there  were  no  planters  who  devoted  them- 
selves entirely  to  the  cultivation  of  cotton.  It  was  grown  on  lands 
unoccupied  by  such  prime  necessities  of  life  as  wheat,  rice,  barley,  and 
other  staples. 

Such  was  the  state  of  cotton  growing  in  Turkestan  before  the  Rus- 
sians entered  that  territory.  The  quantity  produced  fluctuated  accord- 
ing to  the  prices  and  demands  from  other  countries,  Russia  being  the 
largest  customer.  Cotton  cultivation  attained  its  greatest  development 
soon  after  1860,  when  the  Russian  cotton  trade,  together  with  that  of 
other  European  nations,  was  undergoing  a  severe  crisis  in  consequence 
of  the  great  decrease  of  fiber  from  the  United  States.  The  prices 
being  very  high  at  that  time,  its  production  increased  in  the  Bokhara, 
Khiva,  and  Khanstvo  districts,  and  also  in  the  Transcaucasian  dis- 
tricts, to  such  degree  that  the  crisis  passed  more  or  less  fortunately. 
After  the  Russians  had  thoroughly  conquered  Turkestan  the  quantity 
of  cotton  grown  in  that  province  decreased  very  rapidly,  chiefly  on 
account  of  the  decline  in  prices.  Russia,  however,  soon  found  the  value 
of  this  product  to  her  textile  industries  and  began  to  devote  a  great 
deal  of  attention  to  the  development  of  the  plant.  As  it  was  of  great 
importance,  not  only  to  the  province  itself,  but  also  to  Russia,  which  had 
been  obliged  to  buy  all  raw  cotton  from  the  United  States  and  Egypt, 
the  Government  gave  the  culture  every  encouragement. 

As  in  all  other  cotton-raising  countries,  an  effort  was  made  to  intro- 
duce the  American  cotton  into  Turkestan,  but  all  attempts  to  cul- 
tivate the  imported  seed  were  for  ten  years  very  unsuccessful,  mainly 
because  Sea  Island  was  most  frequently  planted  and  the  dry  weather 
of  Turkestan  was  unsuitable  to  this  variety.  In  1880  it  was  discovered 
that  upland  cotton  could  be  successfully  grown  there,  and  energetic 


56  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

measures  were  taken  for  its  introduction  and  cultivation.  The  Govern- 
ment established  a  cotton  plantation  at  Tashkend,  manuals  for  the 
cultivation  of  the  American  upland  cotton  were  published  in  the  Rus- 
sian and  local  languages,  seeds  were  distributed  free  of  cost  to  those 
who  desired  them,  and  the  sale  of  the  cotton  fiber  raised  from  the 
imported  American  seed  was  guaranteed. 

Methods  of  ginning  and  cleaning  the  cotton  were  also  improved,  gins 
being  ordered  from  the  United  States,  with  the  result  that  cotton  fiber 
of  the  American  variety  grown  in  Turkestan  had  a  great  influence  on 
the  Russian  market  and  its  price  was  much  better  than  that  of  Asiatic 
varieties.  The  construction  of  the  Transcaspian  railway  also  had  an 
important  bearing  on  the  increase  of  cotton  growing  in  this  country, 
and  the  area  under  crop  increased  from  810  acres  in  18S4  to  120,150 
acres  in  1889.  In  1890  there  were  245,000  acres  planted  in  cotton  in 
Turkestan,  from  which  more  than  45,600,000  pounds  of  clean  fiber  were 
collected,  an  average  yield  of  180  pounds  per  acre. 

Of  the  three  districts — Syr-Daria,  Fergana,  and  Samarkand — in  which 
most  of  this  cotton  is  raised,  Fergana  is  much  the  largest  producer. 
While  the  production  of  cotton  in  Turkestan  will  in  all  probability 
increase  still  further,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  increase  is 
limited  by  the  extent  of  the  artificially  irrigated  lands  suited  to  cotton 
growing;  yet  within  this  limit,  by  the  rational  employment  of  the  water 
supplies,  especially  those  of  the  Syr-Daria,  and  the  construction  of 
new  irrigation  systems,  the  quality  of  the  crop  may  be  improved  and 
the  quantity  largely  increased. 

The  methods  of  cultivation  of  the  cotton  plant  in  this  region  are 
exceedingly  varied  and  have  not  been  definitely  fixed.  The  more  intelli- 
gent growers  are  still  experimenting  and  seeking  new  methods.  Differ- 
ent systems  of  plowing  and  preparation  of  the  soil,  of  sowing  and 
irrigating,  are  being  adopted  in  the  hope  of  thus  obtaining  better  results. 
Yet,  on  the  whole,  the  methods  of  cultivation  have  changed  compara- 
tively little  and  are  being  very  slowly  perfected.  The  preparation  of 
the  fields  with  improved  implements,  the  manuring  of  the  soil,  and  the 
careful  selection  of  seed  are  only  found  on  the  few  Russian  growers' 
plantations  around  Tashkend,  and  still  more  rarely  in  the  territories  of 
Fergana  and  Samarkand.  "  The  local  planter  breaks  up  the  soil  with 
the  aid  of  a  primitive  wooden  plow  known  as  the  csokha'  (a  turn  plow 
is  unknown),  harrows  the  field  with  a  single  board,  covers  the  seed  by 
hand,  applies  manure  only  in  exceptional  cases,  and  pays  no  attention 
to  the  choice  of  seed,  which  he  sows  broadcast" — in  fact,  makes  use  of 
the  methods  inherited  from  past  generations  of  ignorant  cotton  raisers — 
yet,  thanks  to  the  exceedingly  favorable  conditions  of  soil  and  climate, 
generally  harvests  a  good  crop. 

Most  of  the  plantations  are  small,  those  of  over  270  acres  being 
exceptions.  These  belong  to  Russian  planters  and  trading  firms.  The 
large  majority  of  the  holdings  consist  of  plats  of  from  1  to  15  acres  and 


HISTORY   AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  57 

are  cultivated  by  tbe  natives,  yet  these  small  cultivators  supply  at  least 
90  per  ceut  of  the  total  production. 

The  average  crop  of  upland  cotton  in  the  Syr-Daria  territory  can  be 
taken  as  25  pounds  of  pure  fiber  per  acre,  while  that  of  the  local  variety 
is  about  180  pounds.  In  the  Fergana  and  Samarkand  territories  the 
average  yields  from  the  same  area  are  250  pounds  of  upland  and  100 
pounds  of  local.  Of  course,  in  some  cases,  particularly  when  the 
autumn  is  warm  and  free  from  frost,  considerably  heavier  crops  are 
secured.  There  are  instances  of  yields  of  150  pounds  of  pure  upland 
and  360  pounds  native  cotton  per  acre. 

Almost  all  the  native  cotton  is  still  cleaned  by  wooden  machines 
worked  by  hand  power,  which  while  not  rapid  are  very  cheap.  Nearly 
all  the  upland  cotton  is  sent  to  special,  cleaning  mills,  where  improved 
gins,  generally  worked  by  water  power,  though  sometimes  by  animal 
power  and  less  frequently  by  steam,  are  to  be  found.  These  gins  are 
mainly  in  the  towns  which  serve  as  centers  of  the  cotton-growing  dis- 
tricts, but  a  few  are  to  be  found  in  the  larger  settlements  around  which 
are  extensive  plantations. 

In  1893  there  were  about  100  mills  in  all  Turkestan,  in  which  more 
than  400  gins  and  120  presses  were  at  work.  Most  of  these  gins  were 
imported  from  the  United  States,  but  there  were  also  Russian-made 
gins. 

The  seed  is  used  for  planting,  for  the  production  of  oil,  and  for  fuel. 
The  cake  left  over  from  the  oil  press  is  utilized  as  cattle  food.  The  lint 
is  pressed  into  bales  of  from  250  to  325  pounds,  which  are  then  dis- 
patched to  Samarkand,  the  terminus  of  tbe  Transcaspian  railway,  upon 
the  backs  of  camels  or  in  a  rude  cart  known  as  the  "arba."  The  camel 
load  is  2  bales,  or  500  pounds,  and  an  arba  load  G  bales,  or  1,500 
pounds.  The  almost  impassable  condition  of  some  of  the  roads  makes 
the  transportation  of  cotton  very  slow,  and  a  periodical  delivery  at  the 
railroad  station  is  not  yet  to  be  thought  of,  but  when  new  lines  of  rail- 
way which  have  been  projected  into  the  cotton-growing  districts  are 
finished,  especially  that  from  Samarkand  to  Kokand,  penetrating  the 
Fergana  territory,  transportation  will  be  improved  and  the  cost  of 
delivery  to  the  railway,  and  consequently  to  European  Russia,  will  be 
cheapened,  thus  increasing  the  demand  and  inducing  larger  plantings. 

Cotton  for  European  Russia  is  shipped  from  other  countries  of  cen- 
tral Asia,  namely,  Bokhara,  Khiva,  and  the  Transcaspian  territory. 
Bokhara  produces  about  51,000,000  pounds  of  cotton,  mostly  of  the 
Asiatic  variety.  This  cotton  is  shipped  by  the  Transcaspian  line  of  rail- 
way. Khiva  produces  about  21,000,000  pounds,  almost  exclusively  a 
native  variety,  but  considerably  superior  in  its  quality  to  the  other 
Asiatic  growths.  The  larger  portion  of  this  cotton  enters  Russia  through 
Orenburg  by  camel  caravans;  the  rest  is  dispatched  by  boats  by  the 
way  of  the  Amu-Daria  to  a  station  of  that  name  on  the  Transcaspian 
railway,  and  thence  by  rail. 


58  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

The  Transcaspian  territory  produces  but  360,000  pounds  of  cotton, 
mainly  the  upland  variety,  and  most  of  that  in  the  neighborhood  of 
Merv.  Thus  all  the  central  Asiatic  countries  together  produce 
144,000,000  pounds  of  cotton,  more  than  three-fourths  of  which  is  sent  to 
European  Eussia. 

Another  considerable  district  of  cotton  culture  in  the  Eussian  Domin- 
ion is  Transcaucasia,  where  upland  cotton  has  made  little  progress  in 
displacing  the  variety  cultivated  by  the  natives  from  very  early  times. 
There  are  about  100,000  acres  devoted  to  cotton  in  Transcaucasia,  the 
greater  part  of  which  is  in  the  Erivan  government.  The  total  produc- 
tion in  1891  was  about  22,000,000  pounds,  the  average  crop  being  230 
pounds  per  acre  of  upland,  the  local  plant  not  yielding  quite  so  much. 
The  methods  of  cultivation  are.  being  perfected  and  the  quantity  of 
cotton  produced  is  increasing.  ;- 

It  may  be  said  in  general  that  the  raising  of  American  cotton  has  been 
making  considerable  progress  in  Eussia  and  Turkestan.  In  the  year 
1892  1,080  acres  were  planted  with  American  cotton  in  the  district  of 
Dshisak,  Province  of  Samarkand,  producing  a  crop  of  783,000  pounds  of 
raw  cotton,  from  which  234,000  pounds  of  clean  cotton  was  obtained — 
that  is,  216  pounds  per  acre  on  the  average.  Eeports  of  a  later  date  are 
not  available. 

Experiments  on  methods  of  culture  and  test  of  varieties  are  still 
being  carried  on  in  this  region  under  the  supervision  of  the  Eussian 
Government.  The  American  upland  variety  known  as  Ozier  Silk  is 
generally  grown.  Sea  Island  cotton  will  not  mature  in  this  region 
which  is  near  the  northern  limit  of  successful  cotton  culture,  but  it 
has  been  found  that  with  upland  varieties  the  season  is  shorter  and 
harvesting  is  usually  finished  by  the  time  that  it  begins  in  the  southern 
United  States.  The  quality  of  tbe  fiber  is  apparently  fully  equal  to 
that  of  the  American  product  from  the  same  varieties.  These  results 
are  not  surprising  for  it  is  a  well-known  fact  that  "  nowhere  are  plants 
cultivated  so  advantageously,  whether  from  the  point  of  view  of  quality 
and  quantity  or  that  of  cheapness  of  production,  as  at  the  northern 
limits  of  their  sphere  of  cultivation." 

In  the  whole  Province  of  Samarkand  there  are  8  cotton  gins;  there 
were  in  1890  5,764  acres  planted  with  American  cotton  and  15,762  acres 
with  domestic  cotton;  in  1892  the  proportion  was  reversed,  there  being 
12,204  acres  devoted  to  American  cotton  and  3,510  acres  to  domestic 
cotton. 

In  the  Province  of  Khojend  American  cotton  is  rapidly  taking  the 
lead,  and  the  cotton  acreage  is  also  increasing;  in  1892  there  were  pro- 
duced 3,780,000  pounds,  which  equaled  244  pounds  of  cleaned  cotton 
to  the  acre  on  a  general  average. 

A  steady  progress  of  cotton  culture  would  appear  from  the  statement 
that  the  quantities  of  cotton  carried  by  the  Transcaspian  railroad  to 
the  Eussian  market  have  increased  from  31,428,000  pounds  in  1888 
to  129,168,000  pounds  in  1893,  and  that  of  the  whole  bulk  of  cotton 


HISTORY   AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  59 

shipped  in  1894  72,000,000  pounds  was  American  cotton,  while  in  1884 
there  were  only  250,000  pounds  of  that  variety  raised. 

It  is  said  that  the  plant  deteriorates  in  Turkestan  and  can  only  be 
kept  up  to  its  high  standard  by  frequent  renewal  of  American  seed. 

Notwithstanding  the  large  production  of  cotton  in  this  portion  of 
the  Russian  Empire  and  the  fairly  rapid  development  and  increase 
of  the  crop,  the  time  is  probably  still  far  distant  when  Russian  cotton 
mills  will  manufacture  exclusively  Russian-raised  cotton.  The  supply 
of  cotton  from  central  Asia  in  the  Russian  markets,  though  largely 
increased  of  late,  is  still  far  from  being  sufficient  to  satisfy  the  con- 
tinually increasing  demand,  and  the  quantity  of  cotton  imported  is 
diminishing  but  slowly.  The  amount  of  cotton  brought  into  Russia 
from  abroad  in  1891  was  351,939,412  pounds,  the  average  for  the  ten 
years  preceding  being  290,000,000  pounds.  The  greatest  quantity  of 
cotton  used  in  Russia  comes  via  the  European  frontier  from  the  United 
States,  Great  Britain,  Germany,  and  Egypt.  Great  Britain  and  Ger- 
many send  American,  Brazilian,  Indian,  and  perhaps  also  Egyptian 
cotton.  In  1891  Russia  imported  from  the  United  States  136,749,492 
pounds,  from  Great  Britain  23,597,820  pounds,  from  Egypt  04,749,492 
pounds,  and  from  Germany  24,347,73G  pounds,  and  used  about  108,- 
000,000  pounds  (nearly  one-third  of  the  total  consumption)  of  the  prod- 
uct of  her  Asiatic  dominions.  The  entire  consumption  of  cotton  in 
European  Russia  appears  to  have  been  500,000,000  pounds  in  1892  and 
about  70,000,000  less  in  1893.  It  is  possible  that  the  construction  of 
railroads  into  the  cotton-growing  regions  and  improvements  in  methods 
of  culture  will  ultimately  result  in  a  balance  between  Russian  exports 
and  imports  of  cotton. 

This  view  appears  to  have  some  confirmation  from  the  figures  of  the 
cotton  trade  of  the  United  States  with  Russia.  During  the  four  years 
1881-1884  the  United  States  exported  annually  an  average  of  124,117,441 
pounds  of  cotton  to  Russia.  In  the  period  1885-1888  the  average 
was  86,014,804  pounds,  and  it  fell  to  75,889,614  pounds  in  the  period 
of  1889-1892.  The  decline  was  from  134,000,000  pounds  in  1881  to 
67,000,000  pounds  in  1892,  a  fall  of  50  per  cent.  Thus,  while  there  is 
probably  no  immediate  prospect  of  Russia  producing  all  the  cotton  she 
needs,  our  own  declining  trade  gives  some  warrant  for  apprehension 
that  in  the  future  our  cotton  planters  will  meet  a  competition  from  this 
source. 

COTTON  IN   JAPAN. 

Cotton  (lint,  wata;  plant,  Ica-tvata)  is  cultivated  to  a  considerable 
extent  in  Japan,  where  it  was  introduced  from  India  many  years  prior 
to  its  introduction  into  China.  It  has  ordinarily  been  said  that  the 
introduction  of  cotton  was  from  China  in  the  sixteenth  century,  while 
in  fact  the  cotton  plant  was  cultivated  to  a  limited  extent  in  Japan 
several  hundred  years  previous  to  that  date.     Fesca1  says  that  cotton 

1  Japaiiiacken  Laiulwirtlischaft,  1893,  Pt.  II,  p.  48f>. 


60 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


was  first  accidentally  introduced  into  Japan  in  the  year  781  A.  D.  from 
India,  and  that  its  culture  soon  ceased;  that  again,  several  centuries 
later — probably  1592 — it  was  introduced  by  the  Portuguese,  though  this 
is  not  positively  authenticated.  However,  it  was  in  the  seventeenth 
century,  during  the  reign  of  Tokugawa,  that  the  spread  of  cotton  cul- 
ture in  Japan  began,  which  has  continued  until  the  present  time. 

According  to  a  paper  by  Poate  read  before  the  Asiatic  Society  of 
Japan  in  1870,  one  of  the  old  .and  sacred  books  of  Japan,  called  Wajishi, 
contains  an  account  of  the  introduction  of  cotton  into  that  country 
which  supports  the  above  statement. 

The  cleaning  of  the  cotton  is  largely  done  with  the  scutch,  or  bow, 
and  the  roller  gin,  or  churcka,  is  in  common  use.  The  lint  is  ordinarily 
packed  in  100-pound  bales. 

The  quality  of  the  Japanese  cotton — at  least  that  produced  in  the 
best  cotton  districts — is  good,  though  the  staple  is  considerably  shorter 
than  the  ordinary  tree  or  shrub  cotton.  The  staple  is  seldom  more  than 
1.8  centimeters  in  length.  The  best  cotton  is  also  elastic  and  glossy,  but 
the  gloss  appears  to  be  more  a  result  of  climate  and  locality  than  of 
variety,  a  damp  climate  being  unfavorable  to  the  production  of  glossy 
fiber.  The  cotton  of  the  damp  San-iudo  region  has  little  gloss,  while 
that  of  the  neighboring  province,  especially  that  of  the  Osaka  Fu  and 
Wakayama  Ken,  possesses  a  very  good  gloss.  The  last-named  lint  is 
considered  the  best.  It  is  of  medium  length,  soft,  very  elastic,  and 
glossy  as  silk.  The  strength  of  the  lint  in  the  province  of  Suo  is  well 
known.  That  produced  in  the  San-indo  district  is  mostly  short  staple, 
hard,  and  without  gloss,  probably  on  account  of  the  low  temperature 
aud  humidity  of  the  climate.  In  the  provinces  of  Kuantoebene  and 
Hitachi,  and  on  the  north  edge  of  the  cotton  region,  there  is  produced 
a  long  and  fine  staple  cotton  which  is  quite  elastic  and  strong.  The 
relation  of  lint  to  seed  is  very  favorable.  Generally  it  stands  GO  per 
cent  seed  and  40  per  cent  lint.  The  cotton  of  Kuantoebene  is  an  excep- 
tion to  this,  being  only  between  20  and  30  per  cent  lint.1 

Statistics  of  the  total  product  of  the  Empire  are  to  be  had  for  the 
years  1878-1884,  1887,  1891  in  unginned  cotton  and  are  as  follows: 

Total  production  of  unginned  cotton  in  Japan."1 


Tear. 

Pounds. 

Tear. 

Pounds. 

1878 

118,  958,  541 
207,  888,  208 
118,  685,  333 
120,  678,  880 
115, 162,  850 

1883 

139,  510,  675 

1879 

1884 

127,  493,  691 

1880 

1887 

186,  571,  583 

1881 

1891 

109,  839,  383 

1882 

The  acreage  under  cotton,  while  not  in  itself  large,  is  in  fact  much 
larger  than  that  devoted  to  any  other  textile  fabric,  and  in  1887  was  2 

M  Japaniscken  Landwirthschaft,  1893,  Pt.  II,  pp.  474,  475. 

"The  present  production  of  ginned  cotton  is  given  as  about  75,000  bales  (of  400 
pounds)  by  Shepperson. 


HISTORY    AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON.  61 

per  cent  of  the  entire  cultivated  area.  In  west  Japan,  which  produced 
large  quantities  of  cotton,  the  cotton  fields  occupy  4.8  per  cent  of  the 
entire  arable  land,  against  2.77  per  cent  in  middle  Japan,  1.45  per  cent 
in  Shikoku,  0.45  per  cent  in  Kiushiu,  and  0.34  per  cent  in  north  Japan. 
West  Japan  furnishes  nearly  half  of  the  total  production,  49.48  per 
cent;  middle  Japan,  40.07  per  cent,  although  the  cotton  area  of  west 
Japan  is  only  80  per  cent  of  that  of  middle  Japan. 

During  1891  the  amount  of  cotton  raised. was  109,000,000  pounds,  and 
in  1892  Japan  imported  100,000,000  pounds  of  raw  cotton,  of  which  not 
more  than  one-tenth  came  from  the  United  States,  two-fifths  from  China, 
and  one-half  from  all  the  other  countries;  and  her  exports  amounted  to 
325,000  pounds  of  raw  cotton,  of  which  300,000  pounds  went  to  Korea, 
leaving  for  home  consumption  somewhat  over  208,000,000  pounds. 
During  the  years  1891  and  1892  the  average  value  of  Japanese  coins 
varied  so  much  that  though  the  total  value  of  trade  for  1892  exceeded 
that  of  the  previous  year  by  19,974,000  yens,  yet  when  reduced  to  United 
States  money  at  the  rate  of  exchange  for  that  year  the  increase  was 
only  $761,000,  making  it  difficult  to  satisfactorily  compare  amounts 
with  previous  years.  The  most  important  thing  concerning  the  foreign 
trade  of  Japan  is  the  increasing  facilities  of  the  country  for  manufac- 
turing her  own  supply.  Especially  is  this  noticeable  in  relation  to  cot- 
ton goods.  New  spinning  mills  are  being  established  from  time  to  time, 
and  large  profits  are  made  from  those  already  at  work.  The  consump- 
tion of  cotton  goods  is  increasing  each  year,  and  home  factories  are 
supplying  a  larger  aud  larger  percentage  of  the  entire  amount  con- 
sumed. In  1892  Japan  imported  $9,250,000  worth  of  textile  fabrics,  of 
which  the  larger  portion  was  probably  cotton,  besides  $8,750,000  worth 
of  raw  cotton  and  $5,000,000  worth  of  cotton  threads  and  yarns. 

COTTON  IN   CHINA   AND   KOREA. 


The  Chinese  began  to  make  extensive  use  of  cotton  fiber  about  1300 
A.  D.,  and  since  that  date  the  growth  and  manufacture  of  cotton  has 
reached  immense  proportions  in  the  Celestial  Empire;  but  statistics  of  the 
cotton  crop  in  that  country  are  not  attainable,  the  closest  estimate  being 
1,G00,000  bales  of  400  pounds  each  as  a  product  of  China  and  its  former 
dependency  Korea  at  the  present  time.  The  great  cotton  region  of 
China  lies  along  and  on  both  sides  of  the  river  Yang-tze-Kiang,  where 
the  soil  is  very  fertile,  x>erhaps  surpassing  any  other  district  of  China. 

The  method  of  cultivation  is  very  primitive.  In  some  cases  the 
ground  is  plowed  in  March,  or  as  soon  as  the  frost  is  out  of  the  ground, 
and  the  seed  is  sown  broadcast.  Under  this  system  of  cultivation  the 
plants  grow  very  thickly,  almost  as  close  as  cereals;  they  are  spindling 
and  short  and  the  bolls  are  small.  The  yield  per  acre  varies  from  50 
pounds  to  1,000  pounds  of  unginned  cotton.  The  method  of  cultiva- 
tion varies,  however,  in  different  parts  of  China,  for  in  other  cases  after 


62  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

plowing  the  seed  is  planted  in  hills  on  ridges  and  cultivated  with  the 
hoe. 

About  five  months  after  planting  picking  commences,  this  being  the 
work  of  women  and  children ;  after  the  crop  is  gathered  the  stalks  are 
pulled  up  and  preserved  for  fuel. 

There  are  no  large  cotton  plantations  in  China,  most  of  the  cotton 
being  raised  on  patches  varying  in  size  from  a  few  square  yards  to  one 
or  two  acres.  The  old  Hindoo  churcka  is  generally  used  for  ginning, 
the  scutch  or  bow  for  cleaning,  and  the  spindle  and  handloom  for  manu- 
facturing, but  cotton  factories  are  being  established  in  some  localities.  • 
The  quantity  consumed  can  not  be  determined  from  any  statistics  kept 
at  the  open  ports.  The  farmers  do  not  usually  sell  their  cotton,  but  it 
is  spun  and  woven  by  the  women,  and  any  surplus  cloth  is  sold  in  the 
neighborhood.  They  make  use  of  the  seed  for  the  extraction  of  oil,  and 
use  the  oil  for  illuminating  purposes.  China  exports  some  cotton  to 
Japan,  but  the  imports  of  yarn  and  cloth  from  Japan,  India,  and  Eng- 
land are  far  in  excess  of  the  exportation  of  raw  cotton. 


Though  the  books  of  the  treasury  of  Korea  show  only  190,000  acres 
devoted  to  cotton  culture,  it  is  probable  that  owing  to  the  system  of 
taxation  the  estimate  is  not  more  than  one- fourth  of  what  it  should  be, 
and  that  the  total  acreage  is  about  800,000  acres.  On  this  is  produced 
annually  about  800,000,000  pounds  of  unginned  cotton.  It  is  cleaned 
by  hand  machines  and  yields  about  200,000,000  pounds  of  lint,  or  about 
250  pounds  per  acre.  Most  of  this  is  consumed  at  home,  giving  about  13£ 
pounds  for  each  person.  It  is  grown  chiefly  in  the  provinces  of  Huang- 
Hai,  Chel-La,  and  Kyeng-Sang,  and  to  some  extent  in  Chung-Cheng  and 
Kyeng-Kwi.  Because  of  lack  of  information  on  Korean  affairs,  it  is 
quite  impossible  to  say  how  much  of  the  land  is  suitable  for  cotton, 
but  it  may  be  said  that  the  area  under  culture  is  practically  dependent 
upon  the  price  of  the  fiber.  Probably  one-half  of  the  tillable  land 
might  be  so  cultivated,  although  only  a  small  portion  is  now  used. 

Cotton  was  brought  to  Korea  about  500  years  ago  from  China.  The 
soil  and  climate  have  improved  the  original  plant,  giving  it  a  longer 
staple  and  finer  fiber.  It  is  the  perennial  variety,  but  it  is  found  more 
profitable  to  uproot  it  and  replant  each  year.  The  stalk  is  used  for  fuel 
and  its  ashes  for  manure.  Chinese  usages  are  closely  followed.  Korean 
cotton  fiber  is  considerably  better  than  that  of  China  or  Japan  in  dura- 
bility and  warmth-retaining  qualities.  Cloth  is  all  made  in  nrivate 
families  and  for  private  use,  but  no  statistics  can  be  obtained. 

COTTON   IN   OTHER   COUNTRIES. 

At  least  nine-tenths  of  the  world's  supply  of  cotton  is  produced  by 
the  countries  already  referred  to,  but  there  are  several  other  countries 
which  either  already  produce  small  quantities  of  cotton  or  might  enter 


HISTORY   AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS   OF    COTTON.  63 

the  list  of  cotton-producing  countries.  They  have  climate  and  soil 
suitable  to  the  growth  of  this  plant,  but  are  prevented  at  present  from 
entering  this  industry  upon  any  extended  scale  either  because  of  scanty 
population,  difficulty  of  transportation,  or  greater  profit  gained  from 
the  cultivation  of  other  crops.  The  total  amount  produced  by  these 
countries  as  a  whole  iu  1893  is  estimated  at  about  130,000  bales. 


Of  these,  Mexico,  by  reason  of  its  proximity  to  the  United  States,  is 
probably  for  us  the  most  important.  It  has  been  estimated  by  Ruiz 
tbat  the  annual  production  of  cotton  in  Mexico  prior  to  the  conquest 
by  Cortez  was  about  116,000,000  pounds,  but  under  the  rule  of  the 
Spaniards  the  cultivation  declined  until  it  was  entirely  abandoned  in 
many  sections  of  the  country.  Some  new  impulse  was  felt  about  1860, 
at  which  time  every  country  that  could  produce  cotton  was  called  upon 
to  attempt  to  make  good  the  decrease  of  receipts  by  European  countries 
from  the  United  States.  Since  1882  a  larger  interest  has  developed 
in  Mexico  in  the  culture  of  cotton,  so  that  every  State  suitable  for  its 
culture  has  more  or  less  area  devoted  to  the  plant.  Ruiz,  in  his  report 
on  "  Cotton  in  Mexico,"  estimated  that  in  1892  the  output  equaled 
25,000,000  pounds  of  ginned  cotton. 

The  greater  part  of  the  Mexican  crop  is  produced  in  the  State  of 
Coahuila,  but  there  are  three  well-defined  cotton  sections  in  Mexico — 
one  along  the  eastern  coast,  one  in  the  central  plateau,  and  the  other 
on  the  west  coast,  of  which  the  inland  section  is  the  largest  producer. 
The  crop  there,  however,  is  dependent  upon  the  water  available  for 
irrigation.  Biaconi1  gives  it  as  his  opinion  that  if  all  the  land  suitable 
for  the  purpose  were  put  under  cultivation  the  Mexican  Republic  might 
easily  become  a  rival  of  the  United  States  in  the  production  of  cotton. 
As  the  conditions  now  are,  Mexico  is  obliged  to  purchase  cotton  for  its 
own  needs  from  the  United  States.  The  best  cotton  is  produced  in  the 
State  of  Guerrero  in  the  neighborhood  of  Acapulco,  and  the  most 
inferior  is  produced  in  the  State  of  Chiapas.  In  the  zone  along  the 
Gulf  of  Mexico,  300  miles  long  by  about  50  miles  wide,  cotton  could  be 
raised,  but  a  lack  of  labor  is  a  great  drawback  to  this  enterprise. 
Besides,  coffee  growing  offers  so  much  greater  profit  that  few  agricul- 
turists give  serious  thought  to  tbe  growing  of  cotton.  On  the  Pacific 
Slope  the  cultivation  of  cotton  comprises  the  whole  coast,  where  there  is 
much  laud  that  exhibits  great  fertility;  on  account  of  the  cost  of  trans- 
portation and  lack  of  railway  facilities,  however,  the  extension  of  cotton 
culture  has  been  retarded.  Although  in  the  interior  of  the  country 
there  exists  no  continuous  stretch  of  land  especially  favorable  to  the 
culture  of  cotton,  there  are,  nevertheless,  centers  which  are  capable  of 
becoming  large  producers  of  the  staple.  The  State  of  Coahuila  is 
situated  in  this  section,  and  Laguna  is  the  most  important  of  the  cotton- 

1  "Le  Mexico." 


64  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

growing  districts  of  the  State,  as  it  produces  at  least  one-half  the  cotton 
raised  in  Mexico.  It  is  about  360  miles  southwest  from  Eagle  Pass,  Tex., 
and  is  skirted  by  the  Mexican  International  and  Mexican  Central  rail- 
ways, being  therefore  provided  with  an  outlet  for  its  cotton  crop. 

Cotton  manufacturing — at  least  as  the  term  is  understood  in  these 
modern  days — has  received  an  impulse  only  within  the  last  few  years, 
but  is  extending  itself  so  that  there  is  hardly  a  State  that  has  not  an 
establishment  for  spinning  and  weaving  cotton,  and  these  factories  not 
only  consume  the  entire  home  product,  but  also  from  50,000  to  70,000 
bales  of  cotton  from  the  United  States,  the  amount  increasing  as  the 
shortage  in  the  home-raised  crop  necessitates  larger  imports  from 
abroad. 

PERU. 

Cotton  is  indigenous  to  Peru,  or  at  least  it  has  grown  there  from 
prehistoric  times.1  The  inhabitants  at  the  time  of  the  conquest  by  the 
Spanish  troops  were  clothed  in  cotton,  and  mummies  of  very  ancient 
date  have  been  found  wrapped  in  cloths  or  blankets  wholly  or  in  part 
composed  of  cotton,  but,  as  was  tbe  case  in  Mexico,  the  culture  of  cot- 
ton was  much  neglected  by  the  Spanish  conquerors,  whose  eager  search 
for  precious  metal  led  them  to  ignore  the  greater  agricultural  wealth  of 
their  colonies.  Statistics  as  to  the  output  of  cotton  in  Peru  are  not 
available,  nor  are  the  exports  of  cotton  to  other  countries  to  be  had  for 
dates  earlier  than  18G2,  when  341,243  pounds  were  exported  to  Liver- 
pool. In  1865  the  exports  had  increased  to  4,145,260  pounds.  From 
1885  to  1892  the  average  export  of  cotton  from  Peru  to  Liverpool  was 
about  6,000,000  pounds,  to  which  must  be  added  the  amounts  shipped 
to  New  York.  The  variety  Gossypium  barbadense  peruvianum,  with  a 
rough,  strong  fiber,  is  cultivated  along  the  banks  of  rivers  and  lowlands 
irrigated  by  the  overflowing  streams.  It  is  perennial,  and  when  con- 
ditions are  favorable  will  bear  two  crops  a  year  for  many  years,  but  the 
ordinary  productive  stage  is  about  seven  years.  The  rainy  season  ends 
about  the  middle  of  April,  and  the  first  crop  is  gathered  in  February. 
The  second  crop  is  probably  the  largest  of  the  series,  with  a  gradual 
diminution  with  each  successive  crop  until  the  yield  is  no  longer  remu- 
nerative. The  chief  use  of  this  cotton,  which  is  known  as  "Bough 
Peruvian"  in  commerce,  is  for  mixing  with  wool.  It  lessens  the  tend- 
ency of  the  goods  in  which  it  is  used  to  shrink,  makes  them  more  dura- 
ble, and  gives  a  better  luster  and  finish;  hence  it  is  frequently  used  in 
the  manufacture  of  underwear  and  hosiery.  This  peculiarity  of  the 
Peruvian  cotton  is  probably  the  result  of  soil  and  climate,  and  its  cul- 
tivation is  therefore  likely  to  be  restricted  to  that  country.  It  would 
be  very  difficult  to  find  a  section  in  the  United  States  that  would  fur- 
nish a  uniform  and  high  heat  during  the  ten  months  necessary  for  the 
development  of  the  plant,  or  the  other  conditions  which  contribute  to 
the  successful  cultivation  of  this  cotton. 

1  Auxiliador  da  Industria  Nacional,  1878,  p.  90. 


HISTORY   AND    GENERAL    STATISTICS    OF    COTTON. 


65 


The  imports  into  the  United  States1  for  each  calendar  year  since 
1885  have  been  as  follows : 

Imports  of  Peruvian  cotton  into  the  United  States. 


Year. 


1885 
1886 
1887 
18*8 
1889 
1890 


Bales. 

Tear. 

Bales. 

14 

1891 

10,  515 

843 

1892 

13  000 

2,493 

1893 

24  0U0 

4,279 

1894 

19  000 

7,650 

1895 

24, 000 

9,500 

AFRICA. 

Excluding  Egypt,  which  has  been  treated  in  another  place,  the  con- 
tinent of  Africa  produces  a  considerable  amount  of  cotton  on  both  the 
eastern  and  western  coasts,  as  well  as  in  the  central  part:  in  fact,  the 
whole  population  is  clothed  in  cotton,  the  greater  part  of  which  is 
home  grown  and  manufactured.  Cotton  is  indigenous  to  Senegambia, 
Liberia,  the  Congo  States,  and  Soudan,  and  under  proper  cultivation 
these  districts  are  capable  of  producing  more  cotton  than  is  now  raised 
in  the  United  States,  but  such  a  condition  of  things  is  too  remote  a 
possibility  to  awaken  any  interest  among  cotton  raisers  or  manufac- 
turers at  the  present  time,  and  only  mentioned  to  indicate  a  section 
where  cotton  might  be  abundantly  and  cheaply  produced. 


EAST   INDIES. 

Cotton  is  cultivated  in  all  parts  of  Java,  the  estimated  amount  being 
about  G,500  bales  of  400  pounds  each,  one-half  of  which  is  used  in 
Java  for  stuffing  mattresses,  cushions,  etc.  Some  cotton  is  also  grown 
in  the  Siam  Malay  States  and  is  manufactured  by  the  very  primitive 
homemade  machines  into  a  cloth  very  durable,  but  not  as  attractive 
as  the  cotton  cloths  of  Europe,  which  are  largely  superseding  the 
domestic  product  among  the  natives.  There  has  been  some  exportation 
of  cotton  from  the  East  Indies  to  the  continent  of  Europe,  but  the 
amount  is  comparatively  insignificant. 

WEST  INDIES. 

The  West  Indies  produced  cotton  long  before  it  was  cultivated  in  the 
cotton  belt  of  the  United  States.  For  a  while  the  total  American  sup- 
ply to  Europe  came  from  these  islands.  In  1801  25,000  bales  were 
exported;  in  1836,  20,000  bales;  and  since  that  date  the  crop  exported 
has  steadily  decreased  until  scarcely  a  thousand  bales  are  credited  to 
these  islands.  This  decrease  is  largely  due  to  a  greater  profit  coming 
from  the  cultivation  of  other  crops,  and  there  is  no  prospect  as  long  as 
the  present  conditions  exist  for  an  increase  of  the  cotton  crop  in  the 
West  Indies. 


1903— No.  33- 


1  Cotton  Facts,  December,  1895. 


66  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


THE   LEVANT. 

Under  this  name  the  cotton  raised  in  Greece  and  Turkey  and  her 
provinces  is  known  in  the  European  market.  The  total  amount  is 
small,  probably  not  more  than  20,000  bales  of  400  pounds  each,  25  per 
cent  of  which  is  used  in  the  countries  where  produced,  the  remaining 
75  per  cent  being  shipped  to  England  and  the  continent  of  Europe.  It 
is  safe  to  say  that  the  acreage  under  cotton  culture  in  this  district  is 
decreasing  annually.  Some  of  the  staple  is  long,  white,  and  equal  to 
good  American  cotton. 

SOUTH   SEA   ISLANDS. 

Many  of  the  islands  of  the  South  Sea  or  Southern  Pacific  produce 
some  cotton  of  a  good  staple,  but  their  output,  considered  as  individual 
islands  or  as  a  combined  section,  is  inconsiderable,  having  no  apprecia- 
ble effect  upon  the  supply  in  the  markets  of  the  world. 

Australia  has  also  produced  some  cotton,  and  some  sections  of  the 
country  are  very  well  adapted  to  the  growth  of  the  plant.  Attempts 
have  been  made  to  extend  its  culture,  but  without  success,  owing  prob- 
ably to  the  sparse  population  and  the  comparatively  small  returns  from 
the  cultivation  of  the  fiber. 


BOTANY  OF  COTTON. 

By  Walter  H.  Evans,  Ph.  D. 

Office  of  Experiment  Stations. 

The  cotton  plant  belongs  to  the  Malvaceae,  or  the  mallow  family,  and 
is  known  scientifically  by  the  generic  name  Gossypinm.  It  is  indigenous 
principally  to  the  islands  and  maritime  regions  of  the  tropics,  but  under 
cultivation  its  range  has  been  extended  to  40°  or  more  on  either  side  of 
the  equator,  or  to  the  isothermal  line  of  60°  F.  In  this  country  lati- 
tude 37°  north  about  represents  the  limit  of  economic  growth.  The 
generic  description  as  compiled  from  various  sources  is  as  follows: 

Gossypium. — Herbaceous,  shrubby  or  arborescent,  perennial,  but  in 
cultivation  herbaceous  and  annual  or  biennial,  often  hairy,  with  long, 
simple,  or  slightly  branched  hairs,  or  soft  and  tomentose,  or  hirsute, 
or  all  the  pubescence  short  and  stellate,  rarely  smooth  throughout; 
stem,  branches,  x>etioles,  peduncles,11  leaves,  involucre,  corolla,  ovary, 
style,  capsule,  and  sometimes  the  cotyledons  more  or  less  covered  with 
small  black  spots  or  glands.  Roots  Ibaprooted,  branching,  long,  and 
penetrating  the  soil  deeply.  Stem  erect,  terete,  with  dark-colored,  ash- 
red,  or  red  bark  and  white  wood,  branching  or  spreading  widely. 
Branches  terete  or  somewhat  angled,  erect  or  spreading,  or  in  cultiva- 
tion sometimes  very  short.  Leaves  alternate,  petioled,  cordate  or  sub- 
cordate,  3  to  7  or  rarely  9  lobed,  occasionally  some  of  the  lower  and  upper 
ones  entire,  3  to  7  veined.  Veins  branching  and  netted ;  the  mid  vein  and 
sometimes  adjacent  ones  bear  a  gland  one-third  or  less  the  distance  from 
their  bases,  or  glands  may  be  wholly  absent.  Stipules  in  pairs,  linear- 
lanceolate,  acuminate,  often  caducous.  Flowers  pedunculate.  Peduncles 
subangular  or  angular,  often  thickened  toward  the  ends,  short  or  very 
short,  erect  or  spreading ;  in  fruit  sometimes  pendulous,  sometimes  gland- 
ular, bearing  a  leafy  involucre.  Involucre  3-leaved,  or  in  cultivation 
sometimes  4;  bracteoles  often  large,  cordate,  erect,  appressed  or  spread- 
ing at  summit,  sometimes  coalescent  at  base  or  adnate  to  the  calyx,  den- 
tate or  laciniate,  sometimes  entire  or  nearly  so,  rarely  linear.  Calyx 
short,  cup-shaped,  truncate,  shortly  5  dentate,  or  more  or  less  5-parted. 
Corolla  hypogynous.  Petals  5,  often  coalescent  at  base  and  by  their 
claws  adnate  to  the  lower  part  of  stamen  tube,  obovate,  more  or  less 
unequally  transversely  dilated  at  summit,  convolute  in  bud.  Stamina! 
column  dilated  at  base,  arched,  surrounding  the  ovary,  naked  below, 
above  narrowed  and  bearing  the  anthers.  Filaments  numerous,  filiform, 
simple  or  branched,  conspicuous,  exserted.  Anthers  kidney-shaped, 
1-celled,  dehiscent  by  a  semicircular  opening  into  two  valves.     Ovary 

67 


68  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

sessile,  simple,  3  to  5  celled.  Ovules  few  or  many,  in  two  series.  Style 
clavate,  3  to  5  parted ;  divisions,  sometimes  erect,  sometimes  twisted 
and  adhering  together,  channeled,  bearing  the  stigmas.  Capsule  more 
or  less  thickened,  leathery,  oval,  ovate-acuminate,  or  subglobose,  mucro- 
nate,  loculicidally  dehiscent  by  3  to  5  valves.  Seed  numerous,  subglo- 
bose, ovate  or  subovate,  oblong  or  angular,  densely  covered  with  cotton 
or  rarely  glabrous.  Fiber  sometimes  of  two  kinds,  one  short  and  closely 
adherent  to  the  seed;  the  other  longer,  more  or  less  silky,  of  single 
simple  flattened  cells  more  or  less  spirally  twisted,  more  readily  separa- 
ble from  the  seed.  Albumen  thin,  membranous,  or  none.  Cotyledons 
Xflicate,  auriculate  at  base,  enveloping  the  straight  radicle. 

Embraced  by  this  description  as  synonyms  are  Sturtia  li.  Brown  and 
Xylon  Tournefort,  both  of  which  are  antedated  by  the  name  Gossypium 
of  Linnaeus. 

On  account  of  their  great  variability  the  species  of  this  genus  are 
difficult  of  limitation,  and  various  attempts  have  been  made  to  classify 
them.  Linnseus  described  at  least  3  species,  and  since  that  time  the 
number  of  species  and  synonyms  has  increased  enormously.  Two 
monographs  of  the  genus  have  been  published  by  Italian  botanists,  the 
first  by  Filippo  Parlatore1  in  1866,  in  which  the  author  recognized  7 
species,  with  8  others  in  doubt.  The  other  monograph  was  by  Agostino 
Todaro,2  published  in  1877,  in  which  are  described  52  species,  with  2  as 
uncertain.  Hamilton  sought  to  avoid  confusion  by  dividing  the  genus 
into  3  species,  the  white  seeded,  black  seeded,  and  yellow  linted,  to 
which  he  gave  the  names  album,  nigrum,  and  croceum.  A  recent  publi- 
cation, Index  Kewensis,3  recognizes  42  species,  of  which  but  a  very  few 
are  of  economic  importance,  and  mentions  88  others  that  have  been 
reduced  to  synonyms,  most  of  them  being  synonyms  of  species  in  com- 
mon cultivation.  The  great  variability  and  the  tendency  to  hybridize 
make  it  difficult  to  determine  to  which  species  a  given  plant  may 
belong.  No  cultivated  plant  responds  so  quickly  to  ameliorated  con- 
ditions of  soil,  climate,  and  cultivation  as  the  cotton  plant,  and  to  this 
fact  is  due  much  of  the  confusion  as  to  species  and  varieties.  Another 
factor  entering  into  the  confusion  is  the  imperfectly  known  types  that 
have  been  described  as  species.  It  has  been  stated  that  some  of  the 
species  now  widely  cultivated  are  wholly  unknown  in  a  wild  state, 
and  some  of  the  specimens  described  by  Linnaeus  were  in  all  probabil- 
ity from  plants  that  had  long  been  in  cultivation.  The  work  of  estab- 
lishing the  origin  of  the  cultivated  species  has  been  still  further 
complicated  by  the  exchange  of  seed  from  country  to  country  th.it  has 
been  going  on  for  at  least  four  centuries. 

Among  the  species  recognized  to  be  of  more  or  less  economic  impor- 
tance are  G.  arboreum,  G.  neglectum,  G.  brasiliense,  G.  herbaceum,  G. 

1  Le  specie  dei  cotoni. 

2Rel.  snlla  coltura  dei  cotoni  in  Italia,  1877-78. 

3  Vol.  2,  pp.  1057, 1058. 


BOTANY    OF    COTTON. 


69 


barbadense,  and  perhaps  a  few  others.  In  this  country  only  the  her- 
baceous cottons  are  cultivated  to  any  extent.  The  shrubby  and  arbo- 
reous are  grown  occasionally  as  curiosities,  but  they  seldom  or  never 
produce  any  lint  in  regions  having  as  low  a  mean  temperature  as  the 
cotton  belt  of  the  United  States. 

The  determination  of  the  species  of  cotton  grown  in  this  country  pre- 
sents some  peculiar  difficulties.  The  authorities  differ  widely  regarding 
the  specific  origin  of  the  short-staple  or  upland  cotton,  while  more 


Fig.  1. — Sea  Island  cotton  (from  photograph  furnished  by  Mississippi  Experiment  Station). 

nearly  agreeing  on  that  of  the  Sea  Island  cotton.  The  latter  is  gener- 
ally considered  as  having  originated  from  0.  barbadense,  a  technical 
description  of  which  is  given  below. 

G.  barbadense  Linn,  was  originally  described  as  having  leaves  3-lobed, 
entire.  A  more  amplified  compiled  description  is  as  follows:  Shrubby, 
perennial,  6  to  8  feet  high,  but  in  cultivation  herbaceous  and  annual  or 
biennial,  3  to  4  feet  high,  glabrous,  dotted  with  more  or  less  prominent 
black  glands.      Stem   erect,   terete,   branching.     Branches   graceful, 


70  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

spreading,  subpyramidal,  somewhat  angular,  ascending,  at  length 
recurving.  Leaves  alternate,  petiolate,  as  long  as  the  petioles,  rotund, 
ovate,  subcordate,  3  to  5  lobed,  sometimes  with  some  of  the  lower  and 
upper  leaves  entire,  cordate,  ovate,  acuminate;  lobes  ovate,  ovate- 
lanceolate,  acute  or  acuminate,  channeled  above,  sinus  subrotund, 
above  green,  lighter  on  the  veins,  glabrous,  beneath  pale  green  and 
glabrous,  3  to  5  veined,  the  niidvein  and  sometimes  one  or  both  pairs 
of  lateral  veins  bearing  a  dark-green  gland  near  their  bases.  Stip- 
ules erect  or  spreading,  curved,  lanceolate-acuminate,  entire,  or  some- 
what laciniate.  Peduncles  equal  to  or  shorter  than  the  petiole, 
erect,  elongating  after  flowering,  rather  thick,  angled,  sometimes 
bearing  a  large  oval  gland  below  the  involucre.  Involucre  3-parted, 
erect,  segments  spreading  at  top,  many-veined,  broadly  cordate- 
ovate,  exceeding  half  the  length  of  the  corolla,  9  to  11  divided  at 
top,  divisions  lanceolate,  acuminate.  Calyx  much  shorter  than  the 
involucre,  bracts  clip  shaped,  slightly  5-toothed  or  entire.  Corolla 
longer  than  the  bracts.  Petals  open,  but  not  widely  expanding  after 
flowering,  broadly  obovate,  obtuse,  crenate  or  undulate  margined,  yel- 
low or  sulphur  colored,  with  a  purple  spot  on  the  claw,  all  becoming 
purplish  in  age.*  Stamens  about  half  the  length  of  the  corolla,  the  tube 
naked  below,  anther  bearing  above.  Style  equaling  or  exceeding  the 
stamens,  3  to  5  parted.  Ovary  ovate,  acute,  glandular,  3,  rarely  4  to  5 
celled.  Capsule  a  little  longer  than  the  persistent  involucre,  oval, 
acuminate,  green,  shining,  3,  rarely  4  to  5  valved.  Valves  oblong  or 
ovate-oblong,  acuminate,  the  points  widely  spreading.  Seed  G  to  9  in 
each  cell,  obovate,  narrowed  at  base,  black.  Fiber  white,  3  to  4  or 
more  times  the  length  of  the  seed,  silky,  easily  separable  from  the  seed. 
Cotyledons  yellowish,  glandular  punctate, 

Species  which  have  been  considered  synonyms  of  G.  barbadense  and 
to  which  the  above  description  will  apply  are  G.  frutescens  Lasteyr., 
G.  fuscum  Roxb.,  G.  glabrum  Lam.,  G.  jamaicense  Macfad.,  G.javani- 
cum  Blume,  G.  maritimum  Todaro,  G.  nigrum  Hamilton,  G.  oligosper- 
mum  Macfad.,  G.  perenne  Blanco,  G.  perurianum  Cav.,  G.  punctatum 
Schum.  andThonn.,  G.  racemosum  Poir.,  G.religiosum  Parlatore,  Q.riti- 
folium  Roxb.,  and  perhaps  others. 

This  species  is  indigenous  to  the  Lesser  Antilles  and  probably  to 
San  Salvador,  the  Bahamas,  Barbados,  Guadaloupe,  and  other  islands 
between  12°  and  26°  north  latitude.  By  cultivation  it  has  been 
extended  throughout  the  West  Indies,  the  maritime  coast  of  the  South- 
ern States,  Central  America,  Puerto  Rico,  Jamaica,  etc.,  southern  Spain, 
Algeria„the  islands  and  coast  of  western  tropical  Africa,  Egypt,  Island 
of  Bourbon,  East  Indies,  Queensland,  New  South  Wales,  etc.  It  may 
be  cultivated  in  any  region  adapted  to  the  olive  and  near  the  sea,  the 
principal  requisite  being  a  hot  and  humid  atmosphere,  but  the  results 
of  acclimatization  indicate  that  the  humid  atmosphere  is  not  entirely  nec- 
essary if  irrigation  be  employed,  as  this  species  is  undoubtedly  grown 


BOTANY    OF    COTTON.  71 

extensively  in  Egypt.  As  a  rule,  the  quality  of  the  staple  increases 
with  the  proximity  to  the  sea,  but  there  are  exceptions  to  this  rule,  as 
that  grown  on  Jamaica  and  some  other  islands  is  of  rather  low  grade, 
while  the  best  fiber  is  produced  along  the  shores  of  Georgia  and  Carolina. 
According  to  Royle1  "the  quality  is  influenced  not  only  by  tempera- 
ture, but  the  balance  between  the  amount  of  moisture  taken  up  by  the 
roots  and  that  given  off  by  the  leaves  must  be  considered,  as  well  as 
the  varied  processes  of  culture  and  choice  of  varieties  suited  to  each 
particular  locality."  This  observation  applies  to  all  kinds  of  cotton, 
and  not  to  the  Sea  Island  alone.  Some  authors  question  the  American 
origin  of  this  species,  and  one,  Maxwell  T.  Masters,2  claims  that  it  is  of 
central  African  origin ;  but  the  weight  of  testimony  is  against  him, 
and  in  all  probability  this  was  the  species  grown  on  the  island  of  San 
Salvador  at  the  time  of  the  landing  of  Columbus  and  by  him  carried 
to  Spain.  Some  authors  claim  to  recognize  a  difference  between  G. 
barbadense  and  67.  maritimum;  but  whether  it  is  more  than  a  cultural 
variation  is  very  difficult  to  determine,  and  for  our  purpose  they  are 
considered  as  botanically  synonymous,  while  they  may  be  commercially 
different. 

There  is  a  well-marked  form  of  the  Sea  Island  cotton.to  which  Todaro 
gave  the  varietal  name  of  polycarpun  to  which  is  usually  referred  the 
Bamia  variety  of  Egyptian  cotton.  It  is  principally  characterized  by 
numerous  flowers  springing  from  a  single  axil,  and  an  erect,  slightly 
branching  habit,  hence  giving  a  large  yield  per  acre.  On  poor  soil  it 
soon  degenerates  to  an  ordinary  form  of  Sea  Island.  This  is  considered 
by  Sir  J.  D.  Hooker3  as  a  well-marked  seminal  sport,  with  a  fastigiate 
habit,  from  some  kind  of  Egyptian  cotton,  the  bulk  of  which  belongs 
to  the  Sea  Island  form  of  G.  barbadense.  In  one  of  the  Kew  reports1 
the  idea  that  Bamia  is  a  hybrid  between  okra  and  cotton  is  shown  to 
be  incorrect.  The  cultivation  of  Bamia  in  Egypt  is  said  to  require 
more  irrigation  than  the  ordinary  kinds. 

The  yield  of  lint  from  Sea  Island  cotton  is  less  than  that  from  any 
other  kind  grown  in  this  country,  but  on  account  of  the  length  and 
quality  of  the  fiber  it  is  adapted  to  uses  to  which  the  other  kinds  are 
not  suited,  and  its  high  market  value  compensates  for  the  small  yield. 

The  botanical  species  from  which  have  been  developed  the  multitudi- 
nous forms  of  upland  cotton  is  of  less  certain  restriction.  Scarcely  any 
of  the  authors  agree  in  some  of  the  most  important  particulars  when 
discussing  its  origin.  However,  the  weight  of  opinion  seems  to  be  that 
the  species  is  either  G.  herbaceum  or  G.  hirsutum,  and  as  these  are  con- 
sidered synonyms  their  description  is  combined  under  the  name  of  the 
former. 

1  Cultivation  of  Cottoii  in  India. 

2  Jour.  Linn.  Soc,  XIX,  p.  213. 

3  Flora  of  British  India. 

4 Kew  Report,  1887,  p.  26. 


72 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


Gr.  herbaceum  Linn. — Shrubby,  perennial,  but  in  cultivation  herba- 
ceous, annual  or  biennial.  Pubescence  variable,  part  being  long,  simple 
or  stellate,  horizontal  or  spreading,  sometimes  short,  stellate,  abundant, 
or  the  plants  may  be  hirsute,  silky,  or  all  pubescence  may  be  more  or 
less  wanting,  the  plants  being  glabrous  or  nearly  so.  Glands  niore  or 
less  prominent.  Stem  terete,  or  somewhat  angled  above,  branching. 
Branches  spreading  or  erect.     Leaves  alternate,  petioled,  the  petioles 


Fie.  2.—  Upland  cotton  (from,  photograph  furnished  jy  Georgia  Experiment  Station). 

about  equaling  the  blades,  cordate  or  subcordate,  3  to  5,  rarely  7-lobed. 
Lobes  from  oval  to  ovate,  acuminate,  pale  green  above,  lighter  beneath, 
more  or  less  hairy  on  the  veins,  3  to  5  or  7-veiued,  the  midveiu  and  some- 
times the  nearest  lateral  veins  glandular  toward  the  base  or  glands 
wanting.  Sinus  obtuse.  Lower  leaves  sometimes  cordate,  acuminate, 
entire,  or  slightly  lobed.  Stipules  erect  or  spreading,  ovate-lanceolate 
to  h'near  lanceolate,  acuminate,  entire  oi  occasionally  somewhat  dentate. 
Peduncles  erect  in  flower,  becoming  pendulous  in  fruit.     Involucre  3, 


BOTANY   OF    COTTON.  73 

rarely  4  parted,  shorter  than  the  corolla,  appressed  spreading  in  fruit, 
broadly  cordate,  incisely  serrate,  the  divisions  lanceolate,  acuminate, 
entire  or  sometimes  sparingly  dentate.  Calyx  less  than  half  the  length 
of  the  involucre,  cup-shaped,  dentate,  with  short  teeth.  Petals  erect, 
spreading,  obovate  or  cuneate,  obtuse  or  emarginate,  curled  or  crenu- 
late,  white  or  pale  yellow,  usually  with  a  purple  spot  near  the  base,  in 
age  becoming  reddish.  Stamens  half  the  length  of  the  corolla.  Pistil 
equal  or  longer  than  the  stamens.  Ovary  rounded,  obtuse  or  acute, 
glandular,  3  to  5  celled.  Style  about  twice  the  length  of  the  ovary, 
3  to  5  parted  above,  the  glandular  portion  often  marked  with  2  rows  of 
glands.  Capsule  erect,  globose  or  ovate,  obtuse  or  acuminate,  inucro- 
nate,  pale  green,  3  to  5  celled.  Valves  ovate  to  oblong,  with  spreading 
tips.  Seed  5  to  11  in  each  cell,  free,  obovate  to  subglabrous,  narrowed 
at  base,  clothed  with  two  forms  of  fiber,  one  short  and  dense,  closely 
enveloping  the  seed,  the  other  2  to  3  times  the  len  gth  of  the  seed 
white,  silky,  and  separating  with  some  difficulty.  Cotyledons  somewhat 
glandular  punctate. 

This  species  includes  in  its  synonyms  the  following :  G.  album  Hamil- 
ton, G.  chinense  Fisch.  and  Otto,  G.  croceum  Hamilton,  G.  eglandulosum 
Cav.,  G.  elatum  Salisb.,  G.  glandulosum  Steud,  G.  hirsutum  Linn.,  G. 
indicum  Lam.,  G.  latifolium  Murr.,  G.  leoninum  Medic,  G.  macedonicum 
Murr.,  G.  micranthum  Cav.,  G.  molle  Mauri,  G.  nanking  Meyen,  G. 
obtusifolium  Roxb.,  G.  paniculatum  Blanco,  G.  punctatum  Guil.  and 
Perr.,  G.  religiosum  Linn.,  G.  siamense  Tenore,  G.  sinense  Fisch.,  G. 
strictum  Medic,  G.  tricuspidatum  Lam.,  and  G.  vitifolium  Roxb.,  together 
with  numerous  others  the  descriptions  of  which  are  too  indefinite  or 
the  specimens  too  meager  to  determine  them  positively. 

The  origin  of  this  series  is  much  more  confused  than  that  of  the  Sea 
Island  cotton.  If  we  separated  the  upland  cotton  into  two  species,  viz, 
G.  herbaceum  and  G.  hirsutum,  probably  the  question  would  no  doubt 
be  simplified,  as  the  former  is  generally  considered  of  Asiatic  origin, 
while  the  other  is  attributed  to  America.  Todaro 1  claims  that  the  form 
called  by  him  G.  hirsutum  originated  in  Mexico,  from  whence  it  has 
been  spread  by  cultivators  throughout  the  warmer  portions  of  the 
world.  To  this  form  he  ascribes  the  Georgia  upland  cotton  or  the  long- 
staple  upland  cotton.  Parlatore2  considers  it  indigenous  to  some  of  the 
islands  of  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  as  well  as  the  mainland,  and  all  green- 
seeded  cotton,  which  is  cultivated  so  widely,  as  originating  from  this 
form.  On  the  other  hand,  he  claims3  India,  especially  the  shores  of 
Coromandel,  as  the  primitive  home  of  G.  herbaceum,  from  which  place 
it  has  spread  as  extensively  as  its  western  congener,  and  is  found  in 
cultivation  in  nearly  the  same  regions.     Todaro  says4  that  G.  herba- 

'Eel.  Bulla  coltura  dei  cotoni  in  Italia,  1877-78,  p.  212. 

2Le  specie  dei  cotoni,  p.  43. 

■! Ibid.,  p.  33. 

4  Eel.  sulla  coltura  dei  cotoni  in  Italia,  p.  132. 


74  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

ceum  is  spontaneous  in  Asia  and  perhaps  also  in  Egypt,  and  he  claims 
G.  wightianum  as  the  primitive  form  of  the  Indian  cottons.  Maxwell 
T.  Masters  '  claims  G.  stoclcsii  as  the  original  of  all  the  cultivated  forms 
grouped  under  G.  herbaceum.  Others  consider  G.  herbaceum  as  a  native 
of  Africa,  and  it  seems  impossible  from  the  mass  of  conflicting  evidence 
to  determine  just  where  it  did  originate.  It  seems  probable  that  G.  her- 
baceum is  not  a  definite  species,  but  one  developed  by  cultivation  from, 
perhaps,  several  wild  species,  and  it  represents  not  a  species  but  a 
group  of  hybrids  and  forms  more  or  less  closely  related.  However,  if 
we  consider  it  as  a  definite  species,  no  violence  is  done  in  claiming  it  as 
indigenous  to  as  widely  separated  regions  as  America  and  Asia,  nor  is 
it  necessary  to  assume  the  migration  from  one  place  to  the  other,  but 
rather  to  consider  it  an  example  of  simultaneous  evolution  of  a  species 
in  opposite  portions  of  the  globe  without  any  communication  between 
the  progenitors  of  the  species,  examples  of  which  are  well  known.  It 
is  a  case  of  evolution  influenced  by  like  conditions,  and  it  is  probable 
that  the  needs  of  man  entered  very  largely  into  the  development  by 
the  selection  of  certain  characters  which  it  was  desirable  to  perpetuate. 

The  cottons  usually  called  "nankeen"  are  only  color  variations  of 
the  above,  and  may  be  found  in  nearly  every  species  that  is  cultivated. 
Authorities  agree  that  in  all  probability  the  yellow  lint  is  the  wild 
form  of  all  cottons,  and  this  character  can  not  be  used  to  designate 
species. 

Species  of  secondary  importance  that  may  be  occasionally  met  in  this 
country,  or  species  thought  to  be  worthy  of  introduction,  although 
their  value  is  certainly  less  than  those  furnishing  the  staple  crop,  are 
as  follows: 

G.  arboreum  Linn. — Shrubby  perennial,  but  in  cultivation  sometimes 
annual  or  biennial;  tomentose  with  two  forms  of  hairs,  one  long  and 
simple,  the  other  more  numerous,  shorter,  and  stellate;  glands  small, 
scarcely  prominent,  more  or  less  scattered.  Stem  erect,  terete,  very 
branching.  Branches  spreading,  terete.  Leaves  alternate,  petiolate, 
with  petioles  a  little  shorter  than  the  blade,  subcordate,  5  to  7  lobed, 
lobes  oblong-lanceolate  or  lanceolate-acuminate,  bristle-tipped,  scarcely 
channeled  above;  sinus  obtuse,  often  with  a  small  lobe  in  some  of  the 
sinuses,  beneath  pale  green  and  softly  pubescent,  5  to  7  veined,  the  mid- 
vein  and  often  the  two  adjacent  ones  with  a  reddish-yellow  gland  near 
their  base;  upper  leaves  palmately  3  to  5  lobed,  lobes  short.  Stipules 
erect,  spreading,  lanceolate,  acuminate.  Peduncles  axillary,  erect  before 
and  spreading  or  horizontal  after  flowering  and  drooping  in  fruit,  about 
three-fourths  the  length  of  the  petioles,  terete,  destitute  of  glands,  1  to  2, 
usually  1-flowered,  jointed  above  the  middle,  bearing  a  small  leaf  and 
2  stipules  at  this  point.  Involucre  3-parted,  appressed  or  scarcely 
spreading  at  summit,  many-nerved,  broadly  and  deeply  cordate,  ovate, 
acunr.nate,  5  to  9,  rarely  3  dentate  or  nearly  entire.     Calyx  much  shorter 


1  In  Hooker's  Flora  of  British  India. 


BOTANY   OF    COTTON.  75 

than  the  bracts,  subglobose,  truncate,  crenulate  or  subdentate,  with,  a 
large  gland  at  the  base  within  the  involucre.  Corolla  caiupanulate, 
petals  erect  or  spreading,  broadly  cuueate,  subtruncate,  crisp  or  crenu- 
late, purple  or  rose  colored,  with  a  large,  dark-purple  spot  at  the  base. 
Stamina!  tube  about  half  the  length  of  the  corolla.  Pistils  equaling  or 
a  little  longer  than  the  stamens.  Ovary  ovate,  acute,  glandular,  usually 
3  celled.  Style  little  longer  than  the  ovary,  3-parted,  without  glands. 
Capsule  pendulous,  a  little  longer  than  the  persistent  involucre,  ovate 
rounded,  glandular,  3  to  4  celled,  and  valved.  Valves  ovate-oval, 
spreading,  mucronate-acuininate,  the  mucro  recurved.  Seed  ~>  to  G, 
ovate,  obscurely  angled,  black.  Fiber  two  forms,  one  white,  long,  over- 
lying a  dark-green  or  black  down;  not  readily  separable  from  the  seed. 

This  species  of  cotton  appears  to  be  indigenous  to  India  and  the 
regions  bordering  on  the  Indian  Ocean.  According  to  Watt,1  it  is  found 
near  temples  and  in  gardens,  where  it  is  said  to  be  in  flower  most  of  the 
year.  The  plant  is  a  perennial,  lasting  for  five  or  six  years  or  longer, 
and  is  not  used  as  a  field  crop.  The  liber  is  fine,  silky,  and  an  inch  or 
more  in  length,  but  little  of  it  is  produced.  The  cultural  name  given  it 
is  Nurma  or  Deo  cotton,  and  its  use  is  said  to  be  restricted  to  making 
thread  for  the  turbans  of  the  priestly  class.  Its  value  is  said  to  be 
greatly  overrated.    This  species  is  sometimes  known  as  G.  religiosum. 

G.  neglectum  Tod. — Stem  ereet.  Branches  slender,  graceful,  spread- 
ing. Leaves,  lower  ones  3  to  7  palmately  lobed,  segments  lanceolate, 
acute,  rarely  bristle-tipped,  sinus  rounded,  the  small  lobes  in  the  sinuses 
less  distinct  than  in  the  previous  species,  upper  leaves  3-parted.  Stip- 
ules next  the  peduncles  semiovate,  dentate,  the  others  linear-lanceo- 
late, acute.  Peduncles  with  short  lateral  branches,  2  to  4  flowered. 
Involucral  bracts  coalescent  at  base,  deeply  and  acutely  laciniate. 
Petals  less  than  twice  the  length  of  the  involucral  bracts,  obovate. 
unequally  cuneate,  yellow,  with  a  deep-purple  spot  at  base.  Stamen- 
tube  half  the  length  of  the  corolla,  naked  at  base.  Capsule  small, 
ovate,  acute,  cells  5  to  8  seeded,  seed  obovate,  small,  clothed  with  two 
forms  of  fiber,  one  very  short,  closely  adherent,  and  of  an  ashy -green 
color,  the  other  longer,  rather  harsh,  white. 

This  species,  indigenous  to  India,  is  very  similar  to  G.  arboreum, 
and  by  some  is  thought  to  be  a  hybrid  between  that  species  and  some 
other,  or  it  may  be  only  a  cultural  form  of  the  first.  It  is  a  large  bush, 
although  sometimes  only  18  inches  in  height,  aud  is  extensively  grown 
in  India  as  a  field  crop.  It  is  the  Dacca  cotton  of  Royle  and  Roxburgh 
and  the.  China  cotton  of  the  same  authors.  This  species  is  cultivated 
in  Bengal,  the  Punjab,  and  the  Northwest  Provinces,  and  it  constitutes 
to  a  large  extent  the  Bengal  cotton  of  commerce.2  Todaro^  has  sepa- 
rated from  the  species  two  varieties — roxburghianum  and  chinense — 

1  Diet.  Economic  Products  of  India,  Vol.  IV,  p.  5. 

2 Ibid.,  p.  7. 

3  Eel.  sulla  coltura  dei  cotoni  in  Italia,  p.  169. 


76  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

corresponding'  to  the  Dacca  and  China  cottons  above  mentioned.  It  is 
very  probable  that  both  the  varieties  and  the  species  are  not  well 
founded,  but  are  cultural  forms.  There  is  another  Indian  species,  G. 
wiglitianum  Tod.,  that  is  claimed  to  be  the  form  chiefly  cultivated  in 
India.  It  greatly  resembles  the  G.  herbaceum  of  India,  but  differs  from 
that  species  in  that  the  latter  has  broader  and  more  rounded  leaves, 
and  broader,  thinner,  and  deeper  cut  bracteoles.  It  is  characterized 
as  follows : 

G.  ivif/htianum  Tod. — Stems  erect,  somewhat  hairy,  branches  spread- 
ing and  ascending.  Leaves  when  young  densely  covered  with  short, 
thick,  stellate  hairs,  becoming  nearly  glabrate  in  age;  ovate-rotund, 
scarcely  cordate,  3  to  5  rarely  7  lobed,  lobes  ovate,  oblong,  acute,  con- 
stricted at  base  into  a  rounded  sinus.  Stipules  on  the  peduncles 
almost  ovate,  others  linear-lanceolate,  acuminate.  Flowers  yellow 
with  a  deep-purple  spot  at  base,  becoming  reddish  on  the  outside  in 
age.  Bracteoles  small,  slightly  united  at  base,  ovate,  cordate,  acute, 
shortly  toothed.  Peduncles  erect  in  flower,  recurved  in  fruit,  one-fourth 
the  length  of  the  petioles.  Capsule  small,  ovate,  acute,  4-celled,  with 
8  seeds  in  each  cell.  Seeds  small,  ovate,  subrotund,  clothed  with  two 
forms  of  fiber,  the  inner  short  and  closely  adhering,  other  longer,  white 
or  reddish. 

This  species  is  said  to  readily  hybridize  with  G.  neglectum,  and  numer- 
ous species  have  been  founded  upon  these  cultural  forms.  Among 
these  hybrids  are  some  of  the  most  valuable  of  Indian  cottons. 

The  typical  forms  of  the  foregoing  species  of  cotton  have  their  seed 
free  from  each  other,  but  there  is  another  group  in  which  the  seed  of 
each  cell  are  closely  adherent  in  an  oval  mass,  from  which  appearance 
they  are  called  "  kidney  "  cottons.  Most  if  not  all  these  species  are  trop- 
ical, and  their  presence  in  this  country  as  anything  more  than  curiosities 
is  highly  improbable.  The  most  important  of  them  is  G.  braziliense 
Macfad.,  and  in  addition  to  the  fact  of  the  seed  adhering  in  clusters  the 
species  is  an  arborescent  plant  with  very  large,  5  to  7  divaricate  lobed 
leaves  and  very  deeply  laciniate  involucral  bracts.  The  cottons  of 
South  America,  known  to  the  trade  as  Pernambuco,  Ceara,  Santos,  etc., 
are  evidently  not  of  this  species,  but  belong  to  the  G.  barbadense  and 
G.  herbaceum  series. 

The  physiology  and  histology  of  the  cotton  plant  seem  to  be  subjects 
that  have  been  almost  wholly  ignored  by  investigators,  and  the  only 
references  to  these  subjects  are  for  the  most  part  very  general. 

According  to  Heuze,1  the  time  required  for  the  maturity  of  a  cotton 
crop  is  divided  as  follows:  From  seeding  to  flowering,  New  Orleans 
80  to  90  days,  Sea  Island  100  to  110  days;  from  flowering  to  maturity, 
New  Orleans  70  to  80  days,  and  Sea  Island  about  80  days,  making  the 
total  period  of  growth  about  5  to  6£  months.  According  to  the  same 
authority,  the  best  average  daily  temperature  for  the  growth  of  cotton 

1  Plantes  Industrielles,  Vol.  I,  p.  139. 


BOTANY    OF    COTTON. 


77 


is  from  60°  to  68°  F.  for  the  period  from  germination  to  flowering  and 
from  08°  to  78°  from  flowering  to  maturity.  Dr.  Wight *  says  that  for 
the  proper  maturity  of  the  best  qualities  of  American  cotton  an  increas- 
ing temperature  during  the  period  of  greatest  growth  is  required.  The 
failure  to  produce  in  India  a  quality  of  fiber  equal  to  the  American 
product  from  the  same  kind  of  seed  is  attributed  to  the  fact  that  in  the 
climate  of  the  former  there  exists  a  diminishing  rather  than  an  increas- 
ing average  daily  temperature. 

The  effect  of  too  much  rain  is  to  form  too  much  plant  and  not  enough 
fruit,  while  serious  drought  causes  a  stunted  growth  of  the  plant  in 
which  few  bolls  are  formed  and  these  ripen  prematurely.  In  the  latter 
case  the  resultant  crop  is  generally  short  in  staple  and  poor  in  quality. 

The  structure  of  the  cotton  fiber  has  been  studied  to  a  considerable 
extent,  and  the  works  of  Bowman 2  and  Monie 3  may  be  considered  as 
standard  on  this  part  of  the  subject.  The  first  thing  noticed  in  com- 
paring samples  of  cotton  is  the  difference  in  the  length  and  the  fineness 
of  the  fiber,  and  upon  these  factors  almost  entirely  depends  the  com- 
mercial grading  of  the  crop.  The  principal  species  of  cotton  vary  in 
respect  to  the  length  of  their  fiber  within  rather  constant  limits, 
dependent  upon  soil,  culture,  and  atmospheric  conditions.  The  follow- 
ing table  compiled  from  numerous  measurements  taken  during  a  period 
of  years  shows  the  maximum,  minimum,  and  average  length  of  fiber 
for  some  of  the  more  important  varieties,  and  also  the  average  diameter 
of  the  same: 

Length  and  diameter  of  the  principal  cotton  fibers. 


Variety. 


Sea  Island 

New  Orleans 

Texas 

Upland 

Egyptian 

Brazilian 

Indian  varieties : 

Native 

American  seed. 

Sea  Island  seed 


Length  of  staple. 


Average 

—     diameter 

Maximum.    Minimum.    Average.  |   of  staple. 


Inches. 
1.80 
1.16 
1.12 
1.06 
1.52 
1.31 

1.02 
1.21 

1.65 


Inches. 
1.41 


.81 
1.30 
1.03 


.97 
.95 
1.36 


Inches. 
1.61 
1.02 
1.00 
.93 
1.41 
1.17 


1.08 
1.50 


Inch. 
.  000640 
.000775 
.  000763 
.000763 
.000655 
.€00790 

.000844 
.  000825 
. O0U73U 


From  the  above  table  it  will  be  seen  that,  as  a  rule,  the  longer  the 
fiber  the  less  its  diameter.  The  extreme  variation  in  length  of  the  above 
fibers,  from  the  figures  as  shown  in  the  table,  is  from  0.25  to  0.30  inch. 
In  proportion  to  their  size  the  variation  in  diameter  is  much  greater 
than  that  shown  for  the  length. 

If  a  very  immature  boll  be  cut  transversely  the  cut  section  will  show 
that  it  is  divided  by  longitudinal  walls  into  three  or  more  divisions, 

•Jour.  Agr.  Hort.  Soc.  India,  7  (1849-50),  p.  23. 

structure  of  the  Cotton  Fibre,  F.  H.  Bowman,  Manchester,  1881. 

3  The  Cotton  Fibre,  its  Structure,  etc.,  Hugh  Monie,  Manchester  and  London,  1890. 


78  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

and  the  seed  will  be  shown  attached  to  the  inner  angle  of  each  division. 
The  seed  retain  this  attachment  until  they  have  nearly  reached  their 
mature  size  and  the  growth  of  lint  has  begun  on  them,  when  their 
attachments  begin  to  be  absorbed  and  by  the  increased  growth  of  the 
lint  tlie  seed  are  forced  to  the  center  of  the  cavity.  The  development 
of  the  liber  commences  at  the  end  of  the  seed  farthest  from  its  attach- 
ment, and  gradually  spreads  over  the  seed  as  the  process  of  growth  con- 
tinues. The  first  appearance  of  the  cotton  fiber  occurs  a  considerable 
time  before  the  seed  has  attained  its  full  growth,  and  commences  by  the 
development  of  cells  from  the  surface  of  the  seed.  These  cells  seem  to 
have  their  origin  in  the  second  layer  of  cellular  tissue,  and  force  them- 
selves through  the  epidermal  layer,  which  seems  to  be  gradually 
absorbed.  The  cells  which  originate  the  fiber  are  characterized  by  the 
thickness  of  their  cell  walls  when  compared  with  their  diameter.  The 
method  of  growth,  according  to  Bowman,1  is  by  the  successive  linear 
development  of  cells,  the  walls  of  which  are  absorbed  at  the  point  of 
contact  until  an  elongated  cell  is  produced,  which  constitutes  the  cot- 
ton fiber.  The  continued  growth  of  this  mass  of  fiber  assists  in  burst- 
ing open  the  pod  when  the  period  of  maturity  is  reached.  The  length 
of  the  fiber  varies  considerably  on  different  parts  of  the  seed,  being 
longest  on  the  crown  and  shortest  at  the  base.  It  is  claimed  that  the 
fibers  do  not  attain  their  full  length  until  the  pod  has  been  ox>ened  and 
the  fibers  are  exposed  to  the  drying  and  ripening  effect  of  the  air 
and  sun. 

In  their  earliest  stages  the  young  fibers  appear  circular  in  section, 
but  with  their  increase  in  length  the  walls  become  thinner  and  finally 
collapse  into  a  flat,  thin-walled  fiber,  iu  appearance  like  a  thin,  trans- 
parent ribbon.  With  the  opening  of  the  boll  there  is  a  rapid  consoli- 
dation of  the  liquid  cell  contents,  which  by  being  deposited  on  the 
inner  side  of  the  walls  give  to  the  fiber  a  greater  thickness  and  density. 
As  the  degree  of  maturity  is  increased  the  fiber  once  more  becomes 
rounded  in  section.  As  this  action  is  not  perfectly  regular,  owing  to 
the  unequal  pressure  and  deposition  of  the  cell  contents,  the  fibers 
become  twisted,  a  character  readily  recognized  under  the  microscope, 
and  one  that  distinguishes  cotton  from  any  other  fiber. 

In  the  early  period  of  their  formation  the  cells  are  filled  with  astrin- 
gent juices  whose  presence  may  be  recognized  by  applying  the  tongue 
to  the  cut  surface  of  an  immature  boll.  During  the  process  of  ripening 
these  juices  are  replaced  by  others  of  a  neutral  or  saccharine  nature, 
and  when  perfectly  ripe  th  ~  cotton  fiber  consists  almost  entirely  of  cel- 
lulose. 

When  viewed  under  a  microscope  the  general  appearance  of  a  cotton 
fiber  is  that  of  an  irregular,  flattened,  and  somewhat  twisted  tube,  the 
tubular  form  sometimes  being  lost  in  the  completely  flattened  fiber. 
The  edges  of  the  fiber  are  somewhat  thickened  and  slightly  corrugated. 

1  Structure  of  the  Cotton  Fibre,  p.  25. 


BOTANY    OF    COTTON.  79 

The  hollow  tubular  character  aud  constant  diameter  of  the  fiber  are 
maintained  for  about  three-fourths  its  length,  when  it  tapers  to  a  point, 
where  it  is  perfectly  cylindrical  and  often  solid.  From  various  causes 
there  are  often  found  solid  places  in  the  body  of  the  fiber,  and  where 
such  places  exist  the  quality  of  the  staple  is  reduced,  owing  to  the  ine- 
quality with  which  such  fibers  take  up  dyestuffs. 

The  twist  in  the  fiber,  which  seems  to  be  an  acquired  character  not 
possessed  by  wild  cotton,  is  explained  by  Monie '  as  follows: 

The  rotary  motion  begins  with  the  process  of  vacuation  in  the  fiber,  caused  by  the 
withdrawal  of  some  of  the  fluid  in  the  fiber  when  the  seed  begins  to  ripen,  and  as 
this  is  effected  slowly  and  progressively,  beginning  near  the  extremity  farthest  from 
the  seed  and  gradually  receding  toward  the  base,  the  free  end  or  point  becomes 
twisted  on  its  own  axis  several  times,  thus  producing  the  convoluted  form  exhibited 
under  the  microscope. 

In  every  lot  of  cotton  three  classes  of  fibers  may  be  recognized — (1) 
unripe,  (2)  half-ripe,  and  (3)  ripe.  These  conditions  are  dependent 
upon  several  factors,  the  most  important  of  which  is  the  gathering  of 
cotton  before  it  has  been  exposed  for  a  sufficient  time  to  the  ripening 
action  of  the  air  aud  sun.  The  other  cause  is  due  to  the  different  stages 
of  maturity  of  the  filaineuts  on  different  parts  of  the  same  seed.  Unripe 
cotton  when  examined  with  the  aid  of  a  microscope  appears  extremely 
thin  and  transparent,  and  usually  with  little  or  no  twist,  and  it  is  of 
little  use  for  manufacture.  When  used  it  contracts  and  curls  up  in  the 
warm  atmosphere  of  the  factory,  causing  yarn  spun  from  cotton  con- 
taining much  unripe  fiber  to  depreciate  greatly  in  value.  The  half-ripe 
fiber  has  the  same  characters,  but  to  a  lesser  degree,  and  is  more  valu- 
able than  the  former,  but  it  is  only  the  ripe  cotton  fiber  that  possesses 
all  the  requisites  for  perfect  spinning  and  dyeing. 

"  The  differences  of  the  three  kinds  of  fibers  as  observed  under  the 
microscope  are  shown  in  the  accompanying  figures  redrawn  from 
Bowman's  Structure  of  the  Cotton  Fibre. 

A  perfect  cotton  fiber  consists  of  four  parts — (1)  an  outer  membrane, 
which  constitutes  the  outside  skin  of  the  fiber;  (2)  the  real  cellulose, 
which  constitutes  85  per  cent  of  the  fiber;  (3)  a  central  spiral  deposit  of 
a  harder  nature  than  the  rest  of  the  fiber,  and  (4)  a  central  secretion 
that  corresponds  somewhat  to  the  pith  of  a  quill. 

Covering  the  cotton  fiber  is  a  sort  of  varnish  or  oleaginous  deposit, 
technically  known  as  cotton  wax.  This  is  said  by  Monie2  to  amount  to 
about  2  per  cent  by  weight  of  the  fiber,  and  must  be  removed  before  the 
yarn  is  dyed,  otherwise  the  coloring  will  be  poorly  done.  The  presence 
of  this  substance  on  the  fiber  is  readily  shown  by  the  difficulty  with 
which  ordinary  cotton  absorbs  moisture.  Absorbent  cotton  is  cotton 
that  has  been  treated  in  such  a  way  that  all  the  cotton  wax  is  removed. 

The  details  of  treatment  that  the  fiber  must  be  subjected  to  before 

'The  Cotton  Fibre,  its  Structure,  etc.,  p.  25. 
2 Ibid.,  p.  24. 


80 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


spinning  and  dyeing  belong  to  the  technique  of  those  trades,  and  would 
be  out  of  place  in  this  article.     The  theory  which  explains  the  power  of 


Fig.  3. — Cotton  fibers  in  longitudinal  and  cro^s  section:     AAA,  unripe  fibers;  BB,  half-ripe  fibers; 

CCC,  fully  ripe  fibers. 

fibers  to  take  up  and  retain  dyes  seems  not  very  well  authenticated,  and 
is  intentionally  omitted. 


CHEMISTRY  OF   COTTON. 

By  J.  B.  McBkyde,  Chemist  of  the  Tennessee  Experiment  Station,  and  W.  H.  Beal, 
Office  of  Experiment  Stations. 

As  a  rule  our  staple  agricultural  plants  have  not  received  the  thor- 
ough, systematic  chemical  investigation  that  their  importance  demands. 
It  is  true  that  in  many  cases  the  commercial  products  have  been  the 
subject  of  numerous  and  sometimes  exhaustive  chemical  studies,  but  for 
the  plant  as  a  whole,  especially  with  reference  to  its  composition  and 
demands  upon  the  soil  at  different  stages  of  growth,  the  analytical 
data  are  singularly  incomplete  and  unsatisfactory.  This  is  strikingly 
true  of  the  cotton  plant,  of  which  it  has  been  said:  "It  is  more  than 
probable  that  less  is  known  of  the  composition  of  this  plant,  with 
the  exception  of  the  seed,  than  of  any  other  of  our  staple  crops." 
Although  a  number  of  recent  studies  of  the  cotton  plant  have  been 
reported  which  in  a  measure  supply  this  deficiency,  it  will  be  found 
that  of  some  1,500  analyses  of  the  plant  and  its  various  parts  reported 
in  this  article  by  far  the  greater  number  relate  to  the  seed  and  its 
products,  the  rest  of  the  plant,  if  we  except  the  lint,  having  usually 
been  ignored. 

In  the  present  article  chemical  data  relating  to  cotton  have  been  col- 
lected from  every  available  source  and  classified  and  arranged  for  the 
use  of  investigators,  little  technical  discussion  of  the  data  being 
attempted  except  where  it  is  necessary  to  emphasize  a  point  not  clearly 
brought  out  by  the  tables.  As  a  rule  the  data  used  in  the  text  tables 
have  been  limited  to  maxima,  minima,  and  averages  of  the  more  impor- 
tant constituents,  individual  analyses  being  given  only  when  necessary 
to  illustrate  some  particular  point.  A  complete  compilation  of  analy- 
ses will  be  found  in  tables  at  the  end  of  the  article.  The  order  of 
arrangement  is  (1)  the  entire  plant  and  (2)  its  different  parts,  beginning 
with  the  roots.  Under  each  of  the  main  heads  the  order  is  (1)  fertiliz- 
ing constituents,  (2)  proximate  constituents,  and  (3)  miscellaneous  chem- 
ical studies.  This  arrangement  allows  discussion  in  logical  sequence, 
first,  of  the  chemical  data  relating  to  the  demands  upon  the  soil  and 
the  growth  and  development  of  the  plant;  and  second,  that  relating 
to  the  character  of  the  product  and  its  utilization. 

1993— No.  33 6  81 


82 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


ENTIRE  PLANT. 


FERTILIZING    CONSTITUENTS. 


The  results  of  available  analyses  of  the  entire  plant,  including  the 
roots,  are  given  in  tbe  following  table: 

Fertilizing  constituents  of  cotton  {entire  plant) . 


No. 

Tate  of 
analy- 
sis. 

Water. 

Ash. 

Nitro- 
gen. 

Phos- 
phoric 
acid. 

Potash. 

Lime. 

Mag- 
nesia. 

1 
2 

Tonng  plants  collected  June 
3  (with  two  leaves)  a 

Young  plants  collected  June 
23  a 

1890 

1890 

1857 
1890 

Per  ct. 
7.36 

Per  ct. 
17.36 

16.21 
4.57 
5.81 

Per  ct. 
3.82 

3.93 

1.46 

Per  ct. 
3.51 

2.10 
.44 

.44 

Per  ct. 
2.69 

1.90 

M.  17 

1.32 

Per  ct. 
5.34 

4.70 
.82 
1.42 

Per  ct. 
1.29 

1  15 

3 

.46 

4 

do 

.52 

a  Water  free. 


b  Potash  and  soda. 


The  data  are  too  limited  and  unsatisfactory  to  warrant  averages. 
The  analyses  of  young  plants  collected  June  23  show  a  decrease  in  the 
percentages  of  ash  constituents,  especially  phosphoric  acid,  from  those 
found  in  plants  collected  twenty  days  earlier. 

In  connection  with  investigations  on  the  effect  of  different  fertilizers 
on  the  composition  of  cotton  grown  on  poor  and  fertile  soils,  Anderson1 
has  made  analyses  of  the  above  ground  portion  of  cotton  plants  in  the 
flowering  and  boiling  stages,  the  principal  results  of  which  are  given 
in  the  table  below : 

Fertilizing  constituents  in  dry  matter  of  cotton  plants  grown  with  different  fertilizers  on 

poor  and  fertile  soil. 


Potash. 

Phosphoric  acid. 

Nitrogen. 

Flower- 
ing stage. 

Boiling 
stage,  a 

Flower-  {   Boiling 
ing  stage,    stage. a 

Flower- 
ing stage. 

Boiling 
stage.a 

Poor  soil: 

Per  cent. 
2.03 

Per  cent. 
1.26 

Per  cent. 
0.93 

.86 

Per  cent. 
0.79 

Per  cent. 
3.49 
3.91 
3.38 
3.84 
3.86 
3.69 
3.97 

3.65 

3.99 
3.98 
3.72 

Per  cent. 
1  88 

2.75 

.78 
.63 
.70 
.92 

.83 

.83 
.83 
.96 
.91 
.81 
.85 
.80 

.86 

2.14 

1.82 
2 

2.55 

3.14 
3.29 
3.32 
3.23 
2.98 
3.20 
3.10 

3.61 

2.12 
1.05 

2. 12 

2.56 
2.61 

.35 
.54 

.49 

.56 
.74 

1  97 

Nitrogen  and  phosphoric  acid 

1.88 
1  84 

Nitrogen,  potash,   and  phosphoric 

1.83 

fertile  soil: 

2.31 

2.03" 

1.49 

2.75 

3.05 

3.90 

.74 
.69 
.90 

.70 

3.  83              2  <U 

Nitrogen  and  phosphoric  acid 

Potash  and  phosphoric  acid 

Nitrogen,   potash,  and  phosphoric 
acid. 

4.23 
3.87 

4.35 

2.06 
2.44 

2.34 

2.79 

2.10 

.83 

.65 

3.85 

2.10 

a  Small,  immt 

ture  seed 

removed  hefore  analysis. 

Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  57. 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


83 


The  table  shows  that  the  proportions  of  fertilizing-  constituents  of  the 
cotton  plant  vary  greatly  with  varying  conditions  of  soil,  fertilization, 
etc.    From  this  study  Anderson  concludes — 

(1)  That  the  composition  of  the  cotton  plant,  in  respect  to  potash,  phosphoric  acid, 
and  nitrogen,  is  suhject  to  decided  variation  under  varying  conditions. 

(2)  That  the  nature  of  the  soil  exerts  a  considerable  influence  on  the  composition 
of  the  plant,  a  rich  soil  giving  higher  percentages  of  the  three  important  constitu- 
ents than  a  poor  soil. 

(3)  By  fertilizing  with  either  of  the  three  constituents  in  soils  not  already  con- 
taining a  sufficiency  of  the  same  it  is  possible  to  increase  the  percentage  of  that 
constituent  in  the  cotton  plant  which  is  grown  in  such  soil. 

The  averages  also  show  a  notable  decrease  in  the  per  cent  of  fertiliz- 
ing constituents  as  the  period  of  growth  advances. 

Studies  along  this  line,  including  studies  of  the  proximate  constitu- 
ents as  well  as  fertilizing  constituents,  will  undoubtedly  prove  of  the 
greatest  value  in  elucidating  the  principles  of  the  nutrition  of  the  cot- 
ton plant  and  in  developing  a  rational  system  of  fertilization  which  will 
admit  of  general  application. 

The  plan  so  successfully  followed  by  European  investigators  with 
some  of  the  cereals  and  adopted  by  Snyder1  with  such  good  results  in 
work  of  this  character  on  wheat  may  undoubtedly  be  applied  with 
advantage  to  the  cotton  plant.  Anderson,  and  Hutchinson  and  Pat- 
terson2 have  made  a  good  beginning  in  this  direction,  but  their  work 
needs  extension  and  duplication  so  as  to  eliminate  local  and  individual 
peculiarities  before  generalizations  are  safe  or  even  possible. 

Draft  of  the  cotton  plant  on  the  soil. — In  this  connection  we  may  appro- 
priately discuss  the  demands  of  the  cotton  plant  upon  the  fertility  of 
the  soil  as  indicated  by  the  chemical  analyses  thus  far  made.  In  order 
to  do  so  intelligently,  we  must  know  the  relative  proportions  of  the  dif- 
ferent parts  of  the  plant;  but  it  should  be  understood  in  using  the  table 
below  that  however  carefully  they  may  have  been  obtained,  the  figures 
there  reported  represent  the  results  of  examinations  of  cotton  plants, 
grown  under  one  set  of  conditions  only,  and  that  the  proportions  are 
likely  to  vary  greatly  with  variations  of  soil,  season,  fertilizers,  etc.  The 
following  table  is  compiled  from  data  secured  by  McBryde3  from  exami- 
nations of  a  large  number  of  plants : 

Proportions  of  different  parts  of  the  cotton  plant. 
[Water-free.] 


9 

Weight. 

Per  cent. 

Ounces. 

Grams. 

0.513 
1.350 
1.181 

.829 
1.343 

.615 

14.55 
38.26 
33.48 
23.49 
38.07 
17.45 

8.80 

Stems 

23.15 

20.  25 

Bolls 

14.21 

23.03 

10.56 

5.831 

165.  30 

100 

1  Minnesota  Sta.  Bui.  29. 

2 Mississippi  Sta.  Tech.  Bui.  1. 

3  Tennessee  Sta.  Bui.,  Vol.  IV,  No.  5. 

84 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


Calculating  the  averages  of  the  analyses  of  the  different  parts  to  the 
basis  given  in  the  above  table,  we  find  the  amounts  of  soil  ingredients 
removed  by  a  crop  yielding  100  pounds  of  lint  per  acre: 

Fertilising  constituents  in  a  crop  of  cotton  yielding  100  pounds  of  lint  per  acre. 

[Pounds  per  acre.] 


Roots  (83  pounds) 

Stems  (219  pounds) 

Leaves  (192  pounds) 

Bolls  (135  pounds) 

Seed  (218  pounds) 

Lint  (100  pounds) 

Total  crop  (847  pounds) 


Nitrogen. 
0.76 

Phos- 
phoric 
acid. 

Potash. 

Limo. 

Mag 
nesia. 

0.43 

1.00 

0.53 

0.34 

3.20 

1.29 

3.09 

2.12 

.92 

6.16 

2.28 

3.46 

8.52 

1.67 

3.43 

1.30 

2.44 

.69 

.54 

6.82 

2.77 

2.55 

.55 

1.20 

.34 

.10 

.46 

.19 

.08 

20.71 

8.17 

13.06 

12.  60 

4.7& 

McBryde  has  shown  "that  even  when  the  seed  is  taken  away  along 
with  the  lint,  cotton  still  removes  smaller  amounts  of  fertilizing  mate- 
rials from  the  soil  than  either  oats  or  corn."  It  is  an  important  fact  that 
the  lint  and  the  oil,  whose  fertilizing  constituents  alone  are  necessarily 
permanently  lost  to  the  farm,  contain  comparatively  insignificant 
amounts  of  these  constituents.  If,  therefore,  the  roots,  stems,  leaves, 
etc.,  are  turned  under,  and  the  hulls  and  meal  used  on  the  farm  upon 
which  the  cotton  was  grown,  cotton  is  the  least  exhaustive  of  the  staple 
crops  to  the  soil.1 

PROXIMATE   CONSTITUENTS. 

In  the  following  table  are  given  three  proximate  analyses  of  the 
whole  plant  and  three  of  plants  with  seed  cotton  removed.  Nos.  2  and 
3  are  of  very  young  plants.  At  the  date  of  jSTo.  2  the  plant  had  only 
two  leaves.    No.  1  is  of  the  fully  matured  plant : 

Proximate  constituents  of  cotton  {entire  plant) . 


No. 

Date  of 
analy- 
sis. 

Water. 

Ash. 

Protein. 

Fiber. 

Nitro- 
gen- 
free  ex- 
tract. 

Fat. 

1 

Collected  Oct.  25 

1890 

1890 
1890 

Per  ct. 
7.36 
a  10 
a  10 

Per  ct. 
5.81 
15.62 
14.59 

Per  ct. 
9.13 
21.49 
22.09 

Per  ct. 
30.94 
16.38 
18.79 

Per  ct. 

42.84 
32.  51 
29.98 

Per  ct. 
3  92 

2 

4 

3 

Collected  June  23 

4.55 

12.01 

5.30 
5.34 

7.75 

17.57 

6.06 
5.67 
7.31 

22.  04 

35.  33 
40.27 
27.55 

35.11 

44. 18 
36.92 
42.35 

4.15 

4 

5 

Plant  with  seed  cotton  removed 

do  

1882 
1890 
1893 

6.51 
10.76 
12.77 

2.62 
1.04 

6 

do  

1.98 

10.01 

6.13 

6.35 

34.38 

41.15 

1.98 

a  Assumed. 


1  As  will  be  shown  in  subsequent  chapters,  the  exhaustion  of  the  soil  by  cotton  cul- 
ture is  due  very  largely  to  the  fact  that  the  soil  lies  bare  for  a  large  part  of  the  year. 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 
ROOTS. 


85 


FERTILIZING    CONSTITUENTS. 

The  roots,  as  shown  above,  constitute  8.8  per  cent  of  the  entire  plant. 
Data  from  analyses  of  14  samples  of  roots  collected  at  different  stages 
of  growth  are  compared  in  the  following  table,  the  maximum,  minimum, 
and  average  composition  being  compiled  from  18  separate  analyses: 

Fertilizing  constituents  of  cotton  roots. 


No. 


Date  of 
analy- 
sis. 


Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 


July  2... 
July  12. 
July  22. 
Aug.  1.. 
Aug.  11. 
Aug.  22. 
June  18 
June  28 
July  8.. 
July  18. 
July  28. 
Aug.  7.. 
Aug.  17. 
Aug.  28. 


C  Minimum  . 

18  analyses  <  Maximum 

t  Average  . . 


1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 


Water. 


Per  ct. 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a 10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
alO 
a  10 
alO 
a  10 


6.93 
10 
9.06 


Nitro- 
gen. 


Phos- 
phoric 
acid. 


Potash.    Lime. 


Mag- 
nesia. 


Per  ct. 
6.52 
4.87 
4.18 
6.54 
4.04 
3.01 
7.23 
4.78 
4.18 
4.25 
3.29 
3.48 
3.21 
3.54 


3.01 
7.23 
4.50 


Per  et. 
1.13 

1.07 
.91 

1.15 
.94 
.92 

1.58 


.97 

.57 
.71 
.52 

.47 


.47 

1.58 

.92 


Per  ct. 
0.68 
.57 
.36 
.92 
.55 
.31 
.66 
.60 
.58 
.59 
.50 
.47 
.45 
.49 


Per  ct. 

1.69 

1.28 

.99 

1.30 

.96 

.70 

3.10 

1.89 

1.48 

1.57 

.94 

.95 

1.03 

.71 


.70 
3.10 

1.28 


Per  ct. 
1.03 

.85 
.53 
.91 
.76 
.4y 
.69 
.48 
.43 
.40 
.46 
.36 
.43 
.42 


.36 

1.18 

.64 


Pe 


r  ct. 

0.59 
.55 
.41 
.81 
.49 
.34 
.56 
.42 
.39 
.41 
.36 
.31 
.26 
.26 


.26 

.81 
.41 


a  Assumed. 


We  notice  here,  as  in  case  of  the  analyses  of  the  entire  plant,  a 
decrease  in  the  percentage  of  total  ash  as  the  season  advances.  The 
nitrogen  and  potash  also  decrease  under  the  same  circumstances.  The 
phosphoric  acid,  while  somewhat  irregular,  shows  a  tendency  to 
decrease.  The  same  appears  to  hold  true  of  the  lime  and  magnesia, 
indicating  a  more  active  assimilation  of  fertilizing  constituents  during 
the  early  growth  of  the  plant  than  in  the  later  stages.  Still,  the  varia- 
tions are  sufficiently  irregular  during  the  two  seasons  to  emphasize  the 
need  of  more  extended  investigations  in  order  to  establish  the  laws 
governing  the  nutrition  of  this  part  of  the  plant. 


86 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


PROXIMATE    CONSTITUENTS. 


The  table  below  shows  the  proximate  constituents  of  the  roots  at 
various  stages  of  growth  during  two  years,  the  maxima,  minima,  and 
averages  being  compiled  from  15  analyses: 

Proximate  constituents  of  cotton  roots. 


No. 

Date  of 
analy- 
sis! 

Water. 

Ash. 

Protein. 

Fiber. 

Nitrogen- 
free 
extract. 

Fat. 

1 

Collected  July  2 

1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 

Per  cent. 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
alO 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 

Per  cent. 
6.52 
4.87 
4.18 
6.54 
4.04 
3.01 
7.23 
4.78 
4.  18 
4.25 
3.29 
3.48 
3.21 
3.54 

Per  cent. 
7.04 
6.71 
5.67 
7.20 
5.87 
5.75 
9.89 
6.03 
5.35 
6.08 
3.65 
4.45 
3.29 
2.92 

Per  cent. 
42.35 
41.13 
43.94 
42.28 
48.40 
43.73 
41.98 
41.85 
38.  55 
45.32 
45.51 
47.27 
44.71 
47.29 

Per  cent. 
31. 95 
34.  87 
33.62 
31. 79 
30.26 
34.88 
29.14 
36.38 
39. 15 
32.44 
35. 41 
33.31 
37.  04 
34.00 

Per  cent 
2.14 

2 

2.42 

3 
4 

Collected  July  22 

2.59 
2.19 

5 

1.43 

G 

Collected  An "-.22 

2. 63 

7 

1.76 

8 

Collected  June 28 

.90 

q 

2.77 

in 

Collected  July  18 

1.91 

11 

Collected  July  28 

2.14 

V>, 

1.49 

13 

Collected  Aug.  17 

1.75 

11 

Collected  Aug.  28 

2.25 

7.23 
3.01 
4.43 

9.89 
2.92 
5.60 

48.57 
38.55 
44.19 

39.15 
29.14 
33.92 

2.77 

.96 

2.04 

a  Apsumed. 

The  crude  fiber  fluctuated  both  years,  though  the  tendency  was  to  increase.  The 
protein  fluctuated  also,  aud  was  very  different  for  the  two  seasons.  In  1890  it 
remained  nearly  the  same  throughout  the  season,  while  in  1891  the  tendency  was 
rapidly  downward,  being  at  the  end  about  one-third  what  it  was  at  the  beginning 
and  about  half  what  it  was  at  the  close  of  1890.  The  ether  extract  and  carbohydrates 
also  fluctuated,  both  being  higher,  as  a  rule,  the  latter  season.  The  ash  fluctuated 
a  little  both  years,  but  the  tendency  was  to  become  less.  At  the  close  it  was  half 
what  it  was  at  the  beginning  of  the  season.1 

MEDICINAL   PROPERTIES. 

Cotton-root  bark  (Gossypii  radicis  cortex  TJ\S.  P.)  contains  a  chemical 
substance  similar  in  its  action  to  ergot.  The  active  property  appears 
to  reside  in  a  red  resin,  but  as  far  as  can  be  ascertained  no  separated 
principle,  representing  the  full  activity  of  the  bark,  has  yet  been  ex- 
tracted from  the  drug.  E.  S.  Wayne  in  an  article  entitled  "  Medicinal 
properties  of  cotton  roots" 2  gives  ihe  results  of  a  study  of  the  chemical 
properties  of  this  drug. 

STEMS. 

FERTILIZING   CONSTITUENTS. 

The  stems  constitute  about  23  per  cent  of  the  entire  plant.  The  fol- 
lowing table  shows  the  fertilizing  constituents  of  stems  at  various 
stages  of  growth.  The  maxima,  minima,  and  averages  are  compiled 
from  20  analyses. 

1  Mississippi  Sta.  Tech.  Bui.  1. 
2Amer.  Jour.  Pharm.,  1872,  p.  287. 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


87 


Fertilizing  constituents  of  cotton  stems. 


No. 


Date  of 
analy- 
sis. 


Water. 


Ash. 


Nitro- 


Phos- 

plioric 

acid. 


Potash. 


Lime. 


Mag- 
nesia. 


Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 
Collected 


July  2.. 

July  12. 
July  22. 
Aug.  1.. 
Aug.  11. 
Aug.  22. 
June  18. 
J  une  28. 
JulyS.. 
July  IS. 
July  28. 
Aug.  7.. 
Aug.  17. 
Aug.  28. 


1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 


Per  ct. 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
alO 
alO 
alO 
alO 


Per 
6. 
5. 
6. 
5. 
3. 
2. 
9^ 
6. 
5. 
5. 
4. 
4. 
4. 
3. 


Per  ct. 
1.66 
1.66 
1.59 
1.60 
1.03 
.96 
3.28 
1.76 
1.78 
1.54 
1.68 
1.63 
1.10 
1 


Per  ct. 

0.66 
.71 
.51 
.47 
.51 
.26 

1.08 
.76 
.78 
.74 
.88 
.67 
.64 
.49 


Per  ct. 
1.79 
1.18 
1.49 
1.36 
1 

.68 
3.91 
2.35 
1.93 
1.76 
1.34 
1.25 
1.43 
1.04 


Per  ct. 

1.48 

1.28 

1.30 

1.12 

.83 

.56 

1.32 

1.13 

.94 

.88 

.85 

.82 

.73 

.83 


Per  ct. 
0.68 
.67 
.63 
.67 
.44 
.31 
.72 
.50 
.47 
.47 
.35 
.31 
.22 


C  Minimum. 

20  analyses  <  Maximum 
{  Average . . 


8.41 
11.71 
10.01 


2.34 
9.64 

4.80 


.74 
3.28 
1.46 


.59 


.26 
3.91 
1.41 


.50 

1.52 

.97 


.42 


a  Assumed. 

The  same  general  tendencies  observed  in  case  of  the  roots  are  noticed 
here,  but  the  variations  are  more  irregular. 


PROXIMATE    CONSTITUENTS. 


The  table  below  gives  15  proximate  analyses  of  the  stems.  Analyses 
from  1  to  14,  inclusive,  show  the  composition  of  the  stem  at  different 
stages  of  growth,  and  No.  15  is  of  fully  matured  plants. 

Proximate  constituents  of  cotton  stems. 


No. 

Date  of 
analy- 
sis. 

Water. 

Ash.        Protein. 

Fiber. 

Nitrogen- 
free 
extract. 

Pat. 

1 

Collected  July  2 

1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1889 

Per  cent. 
a  10 
a  10 
alO 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
alO 
a  10 
alO 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
10.06 

Per  cent     Per  cent. 
6.63           10.40 

Per  cent. 
40.37 
42.81 
41.65 
48.17 
47.36 
49.44 
32.51 
37.56 
34.64 
33.32 
39.  95 

Per  cent. 
31.04 
30.27 
30.77 
25.89 
30.22 
29.75 
25.59 
33.27 
36.43 
39.87 
31.61 
33.15 
34.88 
35.51 
35.04 

Percent. 
1.56 

fl 

Collected  July  12 

5.39 
6.10 
5.41 
3.93 
2.75 
9.64 
6.44 
5.31 
5.22 
4.44 
4.27 
4.07 
3.92 
4.09 

10.40 

9.94 

10.02 

6.49 

6.04 

20.45 

11.02 

11.13 

9.60 

10.50 

1.13 

S 

Collected  July  22 

1.54 

4 

1.41) 

5 

Collected  Aug.  11 

2.00 

6 

Collected  Aug.  22 

2.02 

7 

1.81 

8 

Collected  June  28   

1.71 

q 

Collected  July  8 

2.49 

10 

1  99 

11 

Collected  July  28 

3  50 

T>, 

10.16  :        36.61 
6.  87           42.  54 

2.21) 
1.64 

13 

14 

15 

Collected  Aug.  28 

6.25 
4.90 

42.71 
45.16 

1.61 
.81 

9.64 
2.75 
5.23 

20.45 
4.90 
9.54 

49.44 
32.51 
40.77 

39.87 
25.59 
32.63 

3.50 

.81 

10 

1.83 

a  Assumed. 

Though  it  fluctuated,  the  crude  fiber  in  the  stem  increased  as  the  plant  matured. 
The  protein  fluctuated,  but  the  tendency  was  to  decrease,  and  this  was  very  marked 
at  the  later  periods  of  growth,  when  the  bolls  were  forming.  The  ether  extract 
fluctuated,  increasiug  at  the  close  in  1890  and  decreasing  at  the  same  period  in  1891. 
The  carbohydrates  remained  nearly  constant  the  first  year  throughout  the  period  of 
growth,  but  increased  slightly  during  the  latter  period  as  the  plant  grew  older. ' 


1  Mississippi  Sta.  Tech.  Bui.  1. 


88 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


LEAVES. 


FERTILIZING   CONSTITUENTS. 


The  leaves  have  been  found  to  be  a  little  over  20  per  cent  of  the 
plant.  The  following  table  gives  16  analyses  of  the  mineral  matter 
of  the  leaves.  JSTos.  1  and  2  are  from  mature  plauts.  Nos.  3  to  16 
are  from  the  same  samples  reported  in  previous  tables,  and  show  the 
chemical  changes  taking  place  iu  leaves  during  a  part  of  their  period 
of  growth : 

Fertilising  constituents  of  cotton  leaves. 


No. 


Leaves  of  mature  plants 
Leaves  of  mature  plants 

Collected  July  2 

Collected  July  12 

Collected  July  22 

Collected  Aug.  1 

Collected  Aug.  11 

Collected  Aug.  22 

Collected  June  18 

Collected  June  28 

Collected  July  8 

Collected  July  18 

Collected  Jul v  28 

Collected  Aug.  7 

Collected  Aug.  17 

Collected  Aug.  28 


i  Minimum . 

19  analyses  <  Maximum 

(  Average .. 


Date  of 
analy- 
sis. 


1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 


Water. 


Per  ct 
9.50 
12.  14 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
«10 
a  10    . 
a  10 
a  10 
a 10 
a  10 


9.50 
12.14 
10.10 


Ash. 


Per  ct. 
16.  42 

12.  05 

13.  68 
14.09 
14.99 
15.32 
12.33 
13.08 
11.92 
12.17 
11.38 
11.57 
13.73 
11.86 
11.93 
10.73 


9.33 
17.26 
13.11 


Nitro- 
gen. 


Per  ct. 
2.37 
2.45 
3.80 
3.92 
3.80 
3.65 
3.21 
3.11 
4.27 
3.87 
3.73 
3.55 
3.53 
!-;.35 
3.03 
2.67 


1.41 
4.27 
3.21 


.42 
2.08 
1.19 


Pot- 
ash. 


Per  ct. 
0.83 
1.33 
2.63 
1.58 
1.48 
1.27 
1.21 
1.65 
2.36 
2.54 
1.93 
2.  21 
L99 
1.59 
1.89 
1.72 


.83 

2.63 
1.80 


Lime. 


Per  ct. 
7.08 
4.10 
5.28 
5.31 
5.63 
5.27 
4.61 
4.66 
3.83 
3.65 
3.68 
3.75 
4.87 
3.89 
3.56 
3.67 


2.71 
7.08 
4.44 


Mag- 
nesia. 


Per  ct. 

1.26 
.76 

1.26 

1.23 
.99 

1.28 
.98 

1.03 
.66 
.66 
.81 
.77 
.93 
.68 
.60 
.82 


.07 

1.28 

.87 


a  Assumed. 

That  there  is  slight  decrease  of  total  ash  as  the  period  of  growth 
advances  is  indicated,  although  this  is  by  no  means  regular.  There  is 
also  a  slight  though  fluctuating  tendency  to  a  decrease  in  all  of  the 
individual  fertilizing  constituents  except  phosphoric  acid,  which  shows 
irregular  but  considerable  increase. 

PROXIMATE   CONSTITUENTS. 


The  table  below  gives  15  proximate  analyses  of  the  leaves  at  various 
stages  of  growth;  they  show  the  chemical  changes  which  take  place  as 
the  plant  advances  in  maturity. 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


89 


Analysis  No.  1  is  of  the  leaves  of  mature  plants,  as  may  be  seen  by 
the  results : 

Proximate  constituents  of  cotton  leaves. 


No. 

Date  of 
analy- 
sis. 

Water. 

Ash. 

Protein. 

Fiber. 

Nitrogen  - 

free 
extract. 

Per  cent. 
43.32 
34.51 
33.89 
34.64 
29.72 
35.13 
37.37 
36.32 
37.10 
37.04 
37.54 
35.14 
37.93 
38.52 
44.16 

Fat. 

1 
2 
3 

CollectedJuly  2 

Collected  July  12 

1889 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 
1891 

Per  cent. 
10.82 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
alO 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
alO 
a  10 
a  10 

Per  cent. 
14.24 
13.68 
14.09 
14.99 
15.32 
12.33 
13.08 
11.92 
12.  17 
11.  39 
11.57 
13.73 
11.86 
11.93 
10.73 

Per  cent. 
15.06 
23.76 
24.53 
23.77 
22.84 
20.08 
19.46 
26.64 
24.19 
23.29 
22.17 
22.06 
20.94 
18.98 
16.74 

Per  cent. 
10.04 
13.69 
13.19 
11.74 
16.73 
18.15 
13.  04 
11.15 
11.45 
11.39 
12.51 
11.29 
12.79 
11.93 
9.50 

Perct. 
6.52 
4.36 
4  30 

4 

Collected  J  uly  22 

4  86 

5 

6 

Collected  Aug.  11 

4.31 

7 

Collected  Aug.  22 

8 

g 

Collected  June  28   

5  09 

10 
11 

Collected  July  8 

Collected  July  18 

6.89 
6  21 

12 
13 

CollectedJuly  28 

7.78 
6  48 

U 

Collected  Au".  17 

8  64 

Li 

Collected  Aug.  28 

8.87 

15.32  i        26.64 
10.  73  i        15.  06 
12.  87          21 .  64 

18.15 
9.50 
12.57 

44.16 
29.72 
36.82 

8  87 

3  97 

6  05 

a  Assumed. 

The  proportionof  crude  liber  in  the  leaves  was  small  throughout  the  entire  periods 
of  growth,  though  it  fluctuated  both  seasons;  it  fell  off  rapidly  at  the  last  period 
botb  years.  The  protein  was  very  high  in  the  leaves,  but  continually  became  less  as 
the  plant  matured.  The  ether  extract  increased  during  the  last  stages  of  growth,  but 
fluctuated  and  was  usually  higher  in  1891.  and  the  same  is  true  of  the  carbohydrates.1 

BOLLS. 


FERTILIZING   CONSTITUENTS. 


The  table  below  shows  analyses  of  the  mineral  matter  of  6  samples 
of  bolls  containing-  lint  and  seed  and  of  3  samples  of  empty  bolls.  The 
latter  constitute  about  14  per  cent  of  the  entire  plant: 

Fertilizing  constituents  of  cotton  bolls. 


No. 

Date  of 
analy- 
sis. 

Water. 

Ash. 

Nitro- 
gen. 

Phos-  i 

phoric  Potash, 
acid. 

Lime. 

Mag- 
nesia. 

1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 

Bolls  collected  J  tily  22 

Bolls  collected  Aug.  1  . . . 

Bolls  collected  Aug.  11 

Bolls  collected  Aug.  22 

Bolls  collected  Aug.  7 

Bolls  collected  Aug.  17 

1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1891 
1891 

Per  ct. 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 
a  10 

Per  ct. 
6.02 
5.71 
5.25 
5.11 
3.87 
3.43 

Per  ct. 
3.11 
2.99 
2.53 
3.03 
1.87 
1.70 

Per  ct. 
1.13 

1.08 
1.04 

.98 
.82 
.71 

Per  ct. 
2.08 
2.14 
2.09 
1.93 
1.41 
1.21 

Per  ct. 
0.74 
.61 
.41 
.51 
.43 
.37 

Per  ct. 
0.44 
.45 
.40 
.41 
.38 
.35 

4.90 

2.54 

.96 

.89 

.40 
.17 

1.81 

1.85 
2.90 
3.23 

.51  |           .40 

1874 
1889 
1890 

9.47 
14.36 

7 

12.96 
7.65 
7.03 

1.03 
1.36 

.87 

3.54  |          .79 

8 

do 

1.09  '          .29 

q 

do 

.77             .21 

11.92 

9.21 

1.08 

.48 

2.66 

1.  80             .  43 

a  Assumed. 


The  analyses  here,  as  in  previous  cases,  seem  to  indicate  a  decrease  in 
fertilizing  constituents  as  the  period  of  growth  advances. 

'Mississippi  Sta.  Tech.,  Bui.  1. 


90 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


PROXIMATE   CONSTITUENTS. 

Hutchinson  and  Patterson  have  reported  6  proximate  analyses  of  this 
product,  as  shown  in  the  following'  table.  Analysis  No.  4  is  of  nearly 
mature  bolls.  The  others  are  presumably  of  immature  bolls  in  which 
the  seed  and  lint  are  undeveloped. 

Analyses  at  different  stages  of  growth  during  two  years  are  given  to 
show  the  development  of  the  plant: 

Proximate  constituents  of  cotton  holla. 


No. 

Date  of 
analy- 
sis. 

Water. 

Ash. 

Protein. 

Fiber 

Xitrogen- 

free 
extract. 

Pat. 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 

Bolls  collected  July  22 

Bolls  collected  Aug.  1 

Bolls  collected  Aug.  11 

Bolls  collected  Aug.  22 

Bolls  collected  Aug.  7 

Bolls  collected  Aug.  17 

1890 
1890 
1890 
1890 
1891 
1891 

Per  cent. 
a  10 
a  10 

3  10 

a  10 
a  10 

a  10 

Per  cent. 
6.02 
5.71 
5.25 
5.11 
3.87 
3.43 

Per  cent. 
19.48 
18.66 
15.83 
18.98 
11.  73 
10.65 

Per  cent. 
14.92 
23 

29.73 
30.36 
7.04 
13.27 

Per  cent. 
46.82 
38  78 
35.65 
26.85 
64.60 
59.78 

Per  cent 
2.73 
3.85 
3.54 
8.70 
2.76 
2.87 

6.02 
3.43 
4.90 

19.48 
10.65 
15.89 

30.36 
7.04 
19.72 

64.60 
26.85 
45.42 

8.70 

2.73 

10 

4.07 

11.92 

7.34 

6.96 

32.50 

39.90  1        1-38 

aAssumed. 

The  crude  liber  in  the  bolls  increased  very  rapidly  as  they  matured,  though  it  was 
much  higher  during  the  first  season.  The  protein,  which  fluctuated  very  little  dur- 
ing the  first  year,  was  very  much  higher  than  it  was  the  second  year,  and  in  the  last 
season  there  was  a  decline  during  the  last  period.  The  ether  extract,  which  was 
very  constant  in  quantity  during  the  earlier  periods  of  development  of  the  bolls, 
increased  greatly  during  the  last  period  in  1890,  when  all  the  bolls  were  nearly 
matured.  The  carbohydrates,  which  were  very  much  higher  during  the  last  year, 
decreased  rapidly  as  the  bolls  matured.1 

LINT. 


FERTILIZING    CONSTITUENTS. 


Lint  constitutes  10.50  per  cent  of  the  mature  plant.  A  number  of 
analyses  with  reference  to  fertilizing  constituents  have  been  made  of 
this  material,  the  results  of  which  are  embodied  in  the  following  table: 

Fertilizing  constituents  of  cotton  lint. 


No. 


Kind  of  lint. 


Sea  Island. 
Upland 


.do. 


....do 

Sea  Island  . 
....do 


Short  staple. 

Upland 

do 

do 


(Minimum  . 

10  analyses  <  Maximum  . 

(.Average  . . 


Date  of 
analy- 
sis. 


1874 
1857 
1857 
1857 
1857 
1857 
1874 
1889 
1890 


6.72 

6.77 


4.72 
6.77 
6.07 


Ash. 


Per  ct. 
1 

1.  14 
.93 
1.25 
1.31 
1.50 
1.50 
1.75 
1.50 
1.80 


.93 

1.80 
i.37 


Nitro- 
gen. 


Per  ct. 


0.54 
.28 
.20 


Phos- 
phoric 
acid. 


Per  ct. 
0.09 
.04 
.11 
.07 
.16 
.17 
.06 
.18 
.07 
.05 


.05 
.18 
.10 


Per  ct. 
0.48 
.47 
.28 
.44 
.28 
.36 
.44 
.37 
.64 
.85 


Per  ct. 
0.11 
.07 
.16 
.21 
.18 
.26 
.11 
.48 
.16 
.15 


.07 
.48 
.19 


Mag- 
nesia. 


Per  ct. 
0.03 
.10 
.03 
.12 
.06 
.02 
.03 
.17 
.11 
.16 


.02 
.17 
.08 


Mississippi  Sta.  Tech.  Bui.  1. 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON.  91 

This  table  makes  it  clear  that  if  the  lint  were  the  only  part  of  the 
plant  removed  from  the  land  on  which  it  is  grown,  cotton  would  be  one 
of  the  least  exhaustive  of  farm  crops.  The  only  other  part  which  need 
be  permanently  lost  to  the  soil  is  the  oil,  which  also  contains  very 
small  amounts  of  fertilizing  constituents. 

Bowman  has  reported1  that  associated  with  cotton  fiber  u  there  are 
small  quantities  of  nitrogen,  on  the  average  about  0.0345  per  cent,  but 
differing  in  different  varieties  of  cotton.  The  nitrogen  appears  to  form 
part  of  the  albuminous  matter  which  was  found  by  Schunck  to  be  con- 
tained in  the  fiber  [see  p.  92].  *  *  *  In  some  cases  it  may  also 
arise  from  or  be  increased  by  the  existence  of  small  quantities  of  nitrates 
associated  with  other  mineral  constituents." 2 

According  to  Calvert, 3  cotton  samples  from  different  countries  con- 
tain the  following  percentages  of  phosphoric  acid  soluble  in  water: 
Egypt,  0.055;  New  Orleans,  0.049;  Bengal,  0.055;  Surat,  0.027;  Car- 
thagena,  0.035  to  0.050,  and  Cyprus,  0.050.4 

PROXIMATE   CONSTITUENTS. 

The  proximate  constituents  of  cotton  lint  were  found  by  an  analysis 
made  at  the  Tennessee  Station  to  be  as  follows:  Water,  6.74  per  cent; 
ash,  1.65;  protein,  1.5;  fiber,  83.71;  nitrogen-free  extract,  5.79,  and  fat, 
0.61,  showing  that  in  its  crude  state,  at  least,  it  is  far  from  being  the 
pure  cellulose  it  is  often  stated  to  be,  a  fact  abundantly  proven  by  the 
investigations  reviewed  on  the  following  pages. 

MISCELLANEOUS   CHEMICAL   STUDIES   OF   COTTON  FIBER. 

Structure  of  cotton  fiber. — O'Neill,5  by  treating  cotton  fiber  with 
Schweitzer's  reagent,  succeeded  in  separating  four  different  constitu- 
ents: (1)  The  outside  membrane,  which  did  not  dissolve  in  the  reagent; 
(2)  the  real  cellulose  beneath,  which  dissolved,  first  swelling  enor- 
mously and  dilating  the  outside  membrane;  (3)  spiral  fibers  appar- 
ently situated  in  or  close  to  the  outside  membrane,  not  readily  soluble 
in  the  copper  solution,  and  (4)  an  insoluble  substance  occupying  the 
cone  of  the  cotton  hair.  He  also  made  a  study  of  the  substance  found 
associated  with  the  cellulose  sheath  in  cotton  fiber,  to  which  Schunck 
has  given  the  name  of  cotton  wax.6  The  composition  of  this  wax 
appears  to  differ  slightly  with  the  different  kinds  of  cotton,  but  an 
average  analysis  of  wax  from  American  fiber  is  reported  as  follows: 
Carbon  80.38  per  cent,  hydrogen  1 4.51  per  cent,  and  oxygen  5.11  per  cent. 

1  Structure  of  the  Cotton  Fibre,  p.  70. 

2 The  figure  here  given  for  nitrogen  by  Bowman,  it  will  be  noticed,  is  much  lower 
than  that  given  in  the  table  above;  so  much  so  that  it  appears  possible  that  his 
decimal  point  may  be  in  the  wrong  place. 

3Compt.  Rend.,  65  (1867),  p.  1150;  Jour,  prakt.  Chem.,  1869,  II,  p.  122. 

4 For  detailed  analyses  of  the  ash  of  cleaned  and  uncleaned  Sea  Island  cotton,  by 
Ure,  see  F.  H.  Bowman,  Structure  of  the  Cotton  Fibre,  1882,  p.  67. 

5  Calico  Printing,  Bleaching,  and  Dyeing,  Vol.  II,  p.  2;  F.  H.  Bowman,  Structure  of 
the  Cotton  Fibre,  1882,  p.  50. 

6  Mem.  Manchester  Lit.  and  Phil.  Soc,  Vol.  IV,  3d  ser.,  p.  95. 


92 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


The  wax  fuses  at  186.8°  F.  and  solidifies  at  179.6°  F.  The  wax  from 
Dhollerah  cotton  differs  from  that  derived  from  tfie  American  fiber  in 
that  it  does  not  solidify  until  it  has  reached  a  temperature  of  177.8°  F. 
"Along-  with  this  wax  is  also  a  fatty  acid,  which  is  white  and  solid,  and 
which  by  analysis  has  been  proven  to  be  identical  with  margaric  acid." 

E.  Schunck1  has  shown  by  careful  investigation  that  cotton,  instead 
of  being  a  pure  cellulose,  "contains  a  number  of  other  ingredients, 
some  of  which  occur  so  constantly  that  they  may  be  considered  essen- 
tial constituents  of  cotton  viewed  as  a  vegetable  product,"  and  which 
may  amount  to  13  per  cent  or  even  more.  This  fact  had  previously  been 
pointed  out  by  Persoz,2  who  states  that  the  fiber  of  cotton,  hemp,  linen, 
etc.,  contains  (1)  a  certain  quantity  of  coloring  matter,  (2)  a  peculiar 
resin  insoluble  in  water  and  soluble  with  difficulty  in  alkalies,  (3)  a 
small  quantity  of  fatty  matter,  and  (4)  inorganic  saline  matters. 
Schunck  succeeded  in  separating  the  following  substances:  (1)  A 
species  of  vegetable  wax,  (2)  a  fatty  acid,  (3)  two  kinds  of  coloring 
matter,  (1)  peptic  acid,  and  (5)  a  trace  of  albuminous  matter. 

Of  the  two  coloring  matters  •"  which  Schunck  succeeded  in  separating  from  Nan- 
kin cotton,  one  was  easily  soluble  in  alcohol  and  was  obtained  on  evaporating  the 
solution  as  a  dark-brown,  shiny,  transparent  residue ;  the  other  was  almost  insoluble 
in  cold  alcohol,  but  dissolved  in  boiling  alcohol,  and  was  deposited  on  the  solution 
cooling,  in  the  form  of  a  light-brown  powder.  Their  properties  are  in  general  the 
same  as  those  of  the  analogous  coloring  matters  from  ordinary  cotton.  Their  com- 
position was  as  follows: 


•    A.                      B. 

Coloring     !      Coloring 
matter  solu-  matter  insolu- 
ble in  cold    |    ble  in  cold 
alcohol.            alcohol. 

c 

Per  cent. 

58.22 
5.42 
3.73 

32.63 

Per  cent. 

57.70 

5.60 

4.99 

31.71 

H 

N 

0 

Total 

100 

100 

The  composition  of  the  analogous  coloring  matters  from  American  cotton,  accord- 
ing to  previous  determinations,  was  as  follows: 


A. 

B. 

c    

Per  cent. 

58.42 
5.85 
5.26 

30.47 

Per  cent. 

58.36 
5.71 
7.60 

28.33 

H 

N    

0 

Total 

100 

100 

The  difference  in  composition,  in  the  first  case  at  least,  is  not  greater  than  may  be 
expected  with  substances  of  the  purity  of  which,  in  consequence  of  tbeir  not  occur- 
ring in  a  crystallized  state,  one  can  never  be  perfectly  sure.  On  the  whole,  I  think 
these  experiments  justify  the  conclusion  at  which  I  have  arrived,  viz,  that  the  color 
of  Nankin  cotton  is  due  to  the  presence  of  bodies  which  are  very  similar  to,  if  not 

^hem.  News  (Amer.  ed.),  2  (1868),  p.  232. 
2Traite  de  l'lmpression  des  Tissna 
3Chem.  News,  29  (1874),  p.  5. 


CHEMISTRY    OP    COTTON.  93 

identical  with,  those  which  cause  the  much  fainter  tints  of  the  ordinary  kinds. 
They  show,  too,  that  the  substances  accompanying  the  cellulose  (whether  clothing 
the  fibers  or  contained  in  their  interior)  are  the  same  with  this  variety  of  cotton  as 
with  all  those  previously  examined. 

Water  content  of  cotton  fiber. — F.  H.  Bowman1  states  that  the  quau 
tity  of  water  in  cotton  fibers  "-varies  with  different  seasous  from  1  to 
about  4  per  cent  in  the  new  crop,  and  rather  less  as  the  season  advances. 
Above  2  per  cent  of  moisture,  however,  seems  to  be  an  excessive  quan- 
tity even  in  a  new  crop  cotton,  and  when  more  than  this  is  present  it  is 
either  the  result  of  a  wet  season  and  the  cotton  has  been  packed  before 
drying,  or  else  it  has  been  artificially  added." 

In  testing  the  quantity  of  so-called  water  of  hydration,  the  author 
found  that  on  heating  to  212°  F.  samples  of  cotton  lost  from  5  to  7  per 
cent  in  weight,  "and  when  they  were  replaced  in  the  same  room  for 
some  days  they  gradually  regained  all  the  weight  they  had  lost." 

Sand  and  mineral  matter  in  different  classes  of  cotton  fiber. — TJre 
reports  determinations  of  the  amount  of  sand  and  mineral  matter  in 
12  different  classes  of  cotton.  "The  samples  were  taken  out  of  bales 
upon  their  arrival  in  Liverpool."  The  results  varied  from  1.15  (rough 
Peruvian)  to  6.22  (Dhollerah)  per  cent,  with  an  average  of  2.51  per  cent, 
the  American  cotton  containing  1.52  per  cent  of  mineral  matter. 

As  a  rule,  it  may  be  taken  for  granted  that  an  excess  of  ash  much 
above  1  per  cent  arises  from  the  presence  of  impurities. 

SEED. 

Sea  Island  and  Egyptian  seeds  are  both  entirely  freed  from  lint  by 
ginning,  but  with  upland  cotton  seed  the  lint  still  adhering  to  the  seed 
after  it  has  passed  through  the  gin  amounts  to  about  10  per  cent  of 
the  total  weight  of  the  seed. 

According  to  the  Tenth  Census,  the  ginned  seed  yields  at  the  oil  mills 
the  following  products : 

Kernels,  50  per  cent,  yielding —  Per  cent. 

Oil 25 

Meal 75 

100 

Hulls,  50  per  cent,  yielding — 

,  Linters 2.  2 

Hulls _...     97.8 

100 

In  the  whole  seed : 

Meal 37.  5 

Oil 12.5 

Hulls 48.9 

Linters 1.1 

100 
structure  of  the  Cotton  Fibre,  1882,  p.  62. 


94 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


While  the  figures  in  these  tables  indicate  how  the  seed  was  divided 
by  the  oil  mills  at  the  time  that  the  data  were  collected,  they  do  not 
represent  the  actual  weights  of  the  different  parts  of  the  seed.  The 
lint,  as  we  have  stated,  was  found  at  the  South  Carolina  Station  to  be 
10  per  cent  by  weight  of  the  ginned  seed.  The  North  Carolina  Station1 
found  from  a  number  of  tests  that  the  proportion  of  hulls  to  kernels 
was  as  follows:  Hulls,  49.9  per  cent;  kernels,  50.1  per  cent.  The 
Texas  Station2  found  the  proportion  as  follows:  Hulls,  45.2  per  cent; 
kernels,  54.8.  J.  H.  Cooper  reports:3  Hulls,  42.25;  kernels,  57.7. 
Adriane4  states  that  Egyptian  seed  shows  37.45  per  cent  hulls  to  62.55 
per  cent  kernels.  These  figures  are  in  each  case  the  averages  of  a 
number  of  tests  where  the  kernels  and  hulls  were  carefully  separated 
by  hand,  and  in  each  case  the  lint  is  included  with  the  hulls.  By 
averaging  these  results  we  obtain  the  following  table,  which  represents 
very  nearly  the  actual  weights  of  the  different  parts  of  the  seed: 

Kernels,  54.22  per  cent,  yielding —  Per  cent. 

Oil 36.88 

Meal 63.12 

100 


Hulls,  45.78  per  cent,  yielding — 

Linters 27.95 

Hulls 72.05 


100 


In  the  whole  seed : 

Meal 

Oil 


34.22 

20 

Hulls 35.78 

Linters 10 

100 

FERTILIZING   CONSTITUENTS. 

The  seed  constitutes  23  per  cent  of  the  weight  of  the  entire  plant. 
The  following  table  gives  a  summary  of  the  results  of  15  analyses  of 
this  part  of  the  plant  with  reference  to  fertilizing  constituents : 

Fertilizing  constituents  of  cotton  seed. 


Minimum. 
Maximum 

Average  -  ■ 


Wa- 
ter. 


Perct. 
7.04 
9.51 

8.42 


Ash. 


Nitro 


Per  ct  Per  ct. 


2.80 
4.96 
3.78 


1.90 
5.17 
3.13 


Phos- 
phoric 
acid. 


Pot- 
ash. 


Soda. 


Perct.  Perct  Perct. 


0.  76  0.  73 
1. 77  1.  63 
1.27     1.17 


0.02 
.50 
.20 


Lime, 


Perct 
0.11 
1.15 

.25 


Mag- 
nesia. 


Per  ct 

0.40 

.79 

.55 


Sul- 
phu- 
ric 
acid. 


Perct 

0.01 

.27 

.12 


Fer- 
ric 
oxid. 


Perct 

0.02 

.13 

.07 


Chlo- 
rin. 


Insol- 
uble 

mat- 
ter. 


Perct.  Perct. 

0.02       0.01 

.18         .12 

.05         .06 


1  North  Carolina  Sta.  Rpt.  1882,  p.  93. 
-Texas  Sta.  Bui.  2. 


^Southern  Cultivator,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  111. 
^Chern.  News,  Jan.,  1865. 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


95 


PROXIMATE   CONSTITUENTS. 


In  the  following  table  is  given  a  summary  of  the  results  of  25  proxi- 
mate anaylses  of  the  whole  cotton  seed,  together  with  similar  sum- 
maries by  Dietrich  and  Konig,  Wolff,  and  Kiihn : 

Proximate  constituents  of  cotton  seed. 


Dietrich  and  Konig's  summary 

Minimum 

Maximum 

Average  (8  analyses) 

Wolff's  average 

Kiihn  s  summary: 

Minimum 

Maximum 

Average 

Summary  of  all  analyses : 

Minimum 

Maximum.- .. 

Average  (25  analyses) 


Water. 

Ash. 

Per  cent. 
8 

11.42 
9.76 
11.40 

Percent. 
2.89 
8 

4.86 
4.30  | 

7.70 
8.90 
8.10 



7.50 

8 

17.51 
9.92 

2.89 

8 

4.74 

Protein.      Fiber. 


Percent. 
13.62 
29.70 
19.56 
19.90 

22.75 
22.80 
22.80 

13.62 
29.70 
19.38 


Per  cent. 
18.93 
32.40 
23. 46 
18.90 


Nitrogen  - 

free 
extract. 


Per  cen  t. 

7.58 

36.  70 

22.45 

20.20 


16 

7.60 

24.70 

15.40 

20.30 

11.50 

17.60 

7.58 

32.40 

36.70 

22.57 

23.94 

Percent. 
10.40 
29.34 
19.91 
25.30 

29.30 
30.  30 
29.80 

10.40 
29.34 
19.45 


MISCELLANEOUS    CHEMICAL   STUDIES. 

Proteids  of  cotton  seed. — T.  B.  Osborne  and  C.  L.  Voorhees  have 
reported1  an  exhaustive  study  of  these  substances.  The  cotton  seed 
used  was  freed  of  the  husk  and  the  fat  removed  with  benzin.  It  was 
then  extracted  with  water,  with  10  and  20  per  cent  sodium  chlorid 
solution  and  with  0.2  per  cent  potash  water.  The  results  were  not 
altogether  satisfactory  to  the  authors,  unusual  difficulties  being  encoun- 
tered in  filtering  the  extracts  and  in  separating  the  coloring  matters. 
With  brine  a  globulin  was  extracted  agreeing  in  composition  and  in 
general  properties  with  the  vitellin  obtained  from  the  seeds  of  wheat, 
maize,  hemp,  castor  bean,  squash,  and  flax,  to  which  the  name  edestiu 
is  given.  The  largest  amount  of  this  found  in  the  oil-free  meal  was 
15.83  per  cent,  and  it  contained  42.3  per  cent  of  the  total  nitrogen  in 
the  meal. 

The  proteid  matter  dissolved  by  water  consisted  almost  wholly  of 
proteose,  amounting  to  about  0.75  per  cent  of  the  oil  free  meal.  The 
potash  extract  contained  so  much  gummy  matter  that  it  was  filtered 
with  difficulty,  and  no  preparation  was  made.  The  nitrogen  in  the 
extract  represented  44.3  per  cent  of  the  total  amount  in  the  meal.  The 
residue  from  the  extraction  with  potash  water  contained  nitrogen 
equivalent  to  11.4  per  cent  of  the  total  amount  in  the  meal. 

Sugar  in  cotton  seed. — The  investigations  of  Kitthausen2  and  Bohm3 
showed  the  presence  in  cotton  seed  of  considerable  amounts  of  sugar. 
By  extraction  of  fine-ground  cotton-seed  cake  with  warm  80  per  cent 

Connecticut  State  Sta.  Rpt.  1893,  pp.  211-217. 
2  Jour.  prak.  Chem.,  29  (1884),  p.  351. 

3Sitzber.  Ges.  Beford.  ges.  Xaturwisseusch.,  Marburg,  1883,  No.  1,  p.  24;  Jour, 
prak.  Chem.,  30  (1884),  p.  37. 


96  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

alcohol,  the  former  obtained  about  3  per  cent  of  crystallizable  material. 
A  study  of  the  physical  and  chemical  properties  of  this  substance  led 
to  the  conclusion  that  it  was  identical  with  the  melitose  of  Berthelot,1 
a  substance  which  had  hitherto  been  obtained  only  from  eucalyptus 
manna.2  Bohm  proposed  the  name  gossypose  for  the  cotton-seed 
sugar,  and  both  lie  and  Ritthausen  evidently  considered  it  a  simple 
and  definite  compound., 

More  recent  investigations,  however,  by  Berthelot3  have  tended  to 
show  that  the  melitose  of  both  eucalyptus  manna  and  of  cotton  seed  is 
a  combination4  of  raffinoseand  an  amorphous  unfermentable  substance 
to  which  Berthelot  gave  the  name  eucalyn.  These  conclusions  regard- 
ing the  compound  nature  of  melitose  have  been  confirmed  by  the 
investigations  of  Tollens  and  Rischbiet.5 

Nitrogen  bases  of  cotton  seed. — In  furtber  investigations  of  the  con- 
stituents of  cotton  seed,  Ritthausen  and  F.  WegerG  found  that  "the 
mother  liquid  of  melitose  from  cotton  seed  dissolved  in  90  per  cent 
spirits  gave  on  the  addition  of  PtCl4  a  crystalline  precipitate,"  which 
was  found  to  be  a  compound  of  betain,  but  it  appears  doubtful  whether 
betain  "  exists  as  such  in  the  seed,  or  whether  it  is  created  by  the 
decomposing  influences  of  acids  during  the  different  evaporations." 
Cholin  was  also  obtained  from  cotton  seed  by  Bohm.7 

M.  Maxwell,8  in  continuation  of  work  by  Bohm  on  cholin,  of  Ritt 
hausen  and  Weger  on  betain,  and  of  Gaehtgens  on  the  toxic  properties 
of  neurin,9  undertook  to  determine  the  extent  to  which  cholin  and 
betain  are  present  in  cotton  seed  or  cotton-seed  meal.  In  a  sample  of 
cotton-seed  meal  he  found  the  following  relative  proportions:  Cholin, 
17.5  per  cent;  betain,  82.5  per  cent.  The  behavior  of  these  substances 
toward  different  chemical  reagents  is  described. 

COTTON-SEED   PRODUCTS. 

Cotton  seed  furnishes  a  variety  of  valuable  commercial  products. 
The  following  diagram  (p.  97),  prepared  by  Grirnshaw10  on  the  basis 
of  the  actual  results  at  oil  mills,  indicates  how  a  ton  of  cotton  seed  is 
utilized. 

"'Ann.  Cbim.  et  Phys.,  ser.  3,  46  (1856),  p.  66. 

-See  Thomson,  Organic  Chemistry  of  Vegetables,  1842;  Mudie,  Jour.  Pharm.,  ser. 
2,  18  (1832),  p.  705;  F.  von  Miiller,  Eucalyptographia,  London  and  Melbourne,  1885, 
10th  decade,  Eucalyptus  viminalis;  and  especially  Johnston,  Lond.  Ebinb.  and 
Dubl.  Phil.  Mag.,  23  (1843),  p.  14;  Jour.  prak.  Chem.,  29  (1843),  p.  485. 

rCompt,  Rend.,  103  (1886),  p.  533. 

"Scheibler,  in  Ber.  deut.  chem.  Ges.,  22  (1889),  p.  3121,  states  that  the  so-called 
encalyn  is  merely  an  impurity  and  inversion  product. 

6Liebig's  Ann.,  232  (1885),  pp.  169,  172;  Ber.  deut.  chem.  Ges.,  18  (1885),  p.  26. 

6  Jour,  prakt.  Chem.,  30  (1884),  p.  32. 

7Address  before  the  Scientific  Society  of  Marburg,  1881. 

8Amer.  Chem.  Jour.,  13  (1891),  p.  469. 

9Dorpat.  med.  Ztschr.,  1  (1870),  p.  161. 

10  Jour.  Frank.  Inst.,  1889,  p.  191. 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 

Products  from  a  ton  of  cotton  seed. 

Cotton  seed,  2,000  pounds. 


97 


Meats,  1,089  pounds. 


Linters,  20  pounds. 


Hulls.  891  pounds. 


Cake,  800 pounds. 


Meal. 


Fiber. 


(Feeding  stuff.     Fertilizer.) 

Crude  oil,  289  pounds. 

Summer  yellow. 


(High-grade  paper.) 


(Winter  yellow 


Cotton-seed  stearin.) 


Soap  stock. 


Soaps. 


Fuel. 


Bran. 


(Cattle  food.) 


Salad  oil. 


Summer  white. 


Lard. 


Fertilizer. 


Cottolene. 


Miners'  oil. 


Soap. 

The  above  diagram  was  prepared  several  years  ago.  Kecently  the 
piocesses  of  manufacture  have  been  so  improved  that  over  300  pounds 
(40  to  45  gallons)  of  oil  can  be  obtained  from  each  ton  of  seed,  and 
delinting  machines  have  been  introduced  which  remove  a  much  larger 
amount  of  linters  than  is  given  in  this  diagram,  the  proportion  of  hulls 
being  correspondingly  reduced. 

COTTON-SEED   HULLS. 

Cotton-seed  hulls,  as  we  have  already  seen,  constitute  45.78  per  cent 
by  weight  of  the  ginned  seed.  They  constitute  the  hard,  outer  cover- 
ing of  the  seed  and  are  composed  principally  of  woody  matter  arranged, 
according  to  Gebek,1  in  five  layers  of  cells.  Gebek  gives  a  description  of 
the  appearance  of  a  section  of  cotton-seed  hull  under  the  microscope, 
and  refers  to  a  detailed  discussion  of  this  material  by  Bretfeld.2 

The  table  of  analyses  on  page  98  shows  that  the  hulls  tire  principally 
crude  fiber  and  nitrogen-free  extract,  these  with  water  constituting 
more  than  90  per  cent  of  the  entire  substance. 

Fertilizing  constituents. — In  the  next  table  will  be  found  a  summary 
of  the  results  of  8  analyses  of  the  mineral  matter  of  cotton-seed  hulls. 

JLandw.  Vers.  Stat.,  42  (1893),  p.  279. 
2  Jour.  Landw.,  1887,  p.  29. 
1993— No.  33 7 


98 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Fertilizing  constituents  of  cottonseed  hulls. 


"Water. 

Ash. 

Nitro- 
gen. 

Phos- 
phoric 
acid. 

Pot- 
ash. 

Soda. 

Lime. 

Mag- 
nesia. 

Sul- 
phuric 

acid. 

Ferric 
oxid. 

Insol- 
uble 
mat- 
ter. 

Per  ct. 
8.76 
11.45 
10.17 

Per  ct. 
2.07 
2.  99 
2.40 

Per  ct. 

0.35 

.9G 

.69 

Per  ct. 

0.  09 

.56 

.25 

Per  ct. 
0.36 
1.32 

1.02 

Per  ct. 

0.01 

.02 

.02 

Per  ct. 
0.13 
1.09 

.18 

Per  ct. 

0.  16 

.35 

.26 

Per  ct. 

0.08 

.09 

.08 

Per  ct. 

0.02 

.04 

.03 

I'r.ct. 
0.01 

.  11 

.05 

Cotton-hull  ashes. — The  cotton-seed  oil  mills  have  in  the  past  largely 
used  the  hulls  for  fuel,  the  ashes  thus  produced  having  been  exten- 
sively used  as  a  fertilizer. 

The  quality  of  these  ashes  varies  greatly  on  account  of  impurities 
introduced,  principally  by  the  use  of  other  fuel  with  the  hulls.  The  table 
below  gives  the  minimum,  maximum,  and  average  composition  of  cot- 
ton-hull ashes  compiled  from  1S5  analyses: 

Fertilizing  constituents  in  cotton-hull  ashes. 


Water. 

Per  ct. 
0.25 
22.  30 
9 

Phos- 
phoric 
acid. 

Pot- 
ash. 

Soda. 

Lime. 

Mag- 
nesia. 

Sul- 
phuric 
acid. 

Ferric 
oxid. 

Car- 
bonic 
acid. 

Chlo- 
riu. 

Insol- 
uble 
niat- 
ler. 

Per  ct. 
2.37 
15.37 
9.08 

Per  ct. 

7.02 

44.72 

23.  40 

Per  ct. 
1.30 
3.86 

2.58 

Per  ct. 
0.86 
19.  35 
8.85 

Per  ct. 
2.85 
17.15 
9.97 

Per  ct. 
2.41 
2.71 
2.56 

Per  ct. 
0.92 
4.93 

2.07 

Per  ct. 
9.56 
11.  59 
10.57 

Per  ct. 
0.21 
3 
1.60 

Pr.ct. 

0  96 

43.  30 

14.04 

Proximate  constituents. — In  the  following  table  will  be  found  a  sum- 
mary of  the  results  of  22  proximate  analyses  of  the  hulls: 

Proximate  constituents  of  cotton  hulls. 


Water.    !      Ash. 

Protein. 

Fiber. 

Nitrogen- 
free 
extract. 

Fat. 

Per  cent. 
7.25 
16.  73 
11.36 

Per  ceii  t. 
1.65 
4.43 
2.73 

Per  cent. 
2.78 
5.37 
4.18 

Per  cent. 
35.75 
66.95 
45.32 

Per  een  t. 
12.41 
41.24 
34.19 

Per  cent. 
0.75 

5.41 

2.22 

COTTON-SEED    BRAN   AND    COTTON-SEED   FEED. 

Cotton-seed  bran  and  cotton-seed  feed  are  products  very  similar  to 
cotton-seed  hulls.  In  fact,  cotton-seed  feed  is  a  mixture  of  cotton-seed 
hulls  and  cotton-seed  meal  ground  together.  Cotton-seed  bran  usually 
consists  of  ground  hulls,  together  with  an  admixture  of  meats  derived 
for  the  most  part  from  the  waste  of  cottonseed  oil  mills,  the  waste  con- 
sisting principally  of  immature  or  frosted  seed. 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


99 


The  following  table  gives  a  summary  of  the  results  of  8  proximate 
analyses  of  these  two  products  grouped  together : 

Proximate  constituents  of  cotton-seed  bran  and  feed. 


Water.         Ash. 

Protein. 

Fiber. 

Nitrogen- 
free 
extract. 

Per  cent. 
30.67 
47.33 
39.22 

Fat. 

Per  cent.    Per  cent. 
8.86  1          2.18 
13.07  i          4.92 
11.66            3.06 

Per  cent. 
6.37 
24.13 
12.01 

Per  cent. 
21.39 
43.28 
30.99 

Per  cent. 
1.33 

5  47 

3  06 

COTTON-SEED    KERNELS. 

By  cotton-seed  kernels  we  mean  the  inner  portion  of  the  seed,  vari- 
ously called  kernels,  meats,  hulled  seed,  or  peeled  seed. 

Fertilizing  constituents. — There  are  apparently  but  few  analyses  of  the 
mineral  constituents  of  the  kernels.  Calvert1  reports  a  partial  analy- 
sis. One  hundred  parts  of  the  kernels  gave  3.52  per  cent  of  ash, 
containing — 

Per  cent. 

Phosphate  of  magnesia 0.  652 

Phosphate  of  iron 053 

Alkaline  phosphate 387 

Other  salts 2.  428 


The  author  states  that  the  kernels  contain  phosphoric  acid  in  both 
the  soluble  and  insoluble  forms. 

The  North  Carolina  Station  has  reported2  a  more  complete  analysis 
of  the  mineral  constituents  of  the  kernels,  as  follows: 

Fertilising  constituents  in  cotton-seed  kernels. 

Per  cent. 

Moisture 6.  27 

Crude  ash 4.  03 

Nitrogen 4.  98 

Phosphoric  acid 1.  73 

Potash 1. 14 

Lime 16 

Magnesia 78 

Ferric  oxid 03 

Sulphuric  acid 12 

Chlorin 01 

Silicic  acid 05 

These  two  analyses  apparently  constitute  the  analytical  data  for 
mineral  matter  of  cotton-seed  kernels. 

^ompt.  Rend.,  65  (1867),  p.  1150;  Jour,  prakt.  Chem.,  1869,  II,  p.  122. 
2 North  Carolina  Sta.  Rpt.  1882,  p.  97. 


100 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


Proximate  constituent*. — The  table  below  gives  the  results  of  7  prox- 
imate analyses  of  this  product: 

Proximate  constituents  of  cotton-seed  kernels. 


No. 

Date  of 
analy- 
sis. 

Water. 

Ash. 

Protein. 

Fiber. 

Nitrogen- 
free 
extract. 

Fat. 

1 
2 
3 

Character  of  seed  unknown . 
Egyptian  seed 

1856 
1870 
1870 

Per  cent. 
6.57 
7.54 
8.12 
7.90 

Per  cent. 
8.91 
8.60 
9.44 

5.00 

Per  cent. 
31.86 
27.  20 
28.12 
29.40 

Per  cent. 

7.30 

32 

33 

1.90 

Per  cent. 

14.82 
71 
74 

17.96 

Per  ct. 
31.28 
23.95 
20.58 

4 

37.84 

7.53 

6.14 
6.27 
6.04 

7.99 

7.02 
4.03 
5.41 

29.14 

4.68 

26.33 

24.33 

Character  of  seed  unknown. 

Kernels  of  cotton  seed 

Kernels  of  cotton  seed 

1870 
1882 
1889 

5 
6 

7 

33.  57 
29.  25 
33.06 

7.16 
4.38 
3.09 

9.11 
19.52 
15.81 

37.00 
36.55 
36.59 

6.04 
8.12 
6.94 

4.03 
9.44 
6.92 

27.20 
33.57 
30.35 

1.90 

7.30 
4.76 

9.11 
19.52 
21.39 

20.58 

37.84 

29.64 

COTTON-SEED    CAKE. 

Renouard  *  states  that  in  1881  three  kinds  of  cotton-seed  cake  were 
recognized  in  France:  (1)  Linty  (cotonneaux),  (2)  crude  (brut),  and 
(3)  refined  (epure). 

The  linty  cake,  so  called  because  it  contains  much  waste  cotton,  is 
used  only  for  manure.  Its  color  is  dark  brown.  The  better  grades  of 
this  cake  are  distinguished  as  cotton  from  Catania,  the  poorer  kinds 
as  cotton  from  Syria.     The  average  composition  of  these  is  as  follows : 


Composition  of  Catanian  and  Syrian  cotton  cake. 


Water 

Oil 

Organic  matter  . 
Ash 

Nitrogen 

Phosphoric  acid 


Catanian. 


Per  cent. 

8.40 

5.20 

79.81 

6.59 


100 
3.23 

2.02 


Syrian. 


Per  cent. 

7.40 

6.92 

80.33 

5.28 


100 
2.86 
1.12 


The  crude  cake  possesses,  when  fresh,  a  greenish  color,  which  on 
storage  passes  over  to  a  brown.  It  contains  large  quantities  of  hard, 
black  fragments  of  the  hulls.  Its  nitrogen  content  is  higher  than  that 
of  the  linty  variety.  It  is  used  exclusively  as  a  cattle  food.  In  trade 
it  is  usually  distinguished  as  cotton  from  the  Levant  or  Alexandria. 
Its  composition  is  as  follows:  Water,  10.98  per  cent;  oil,  6.09;  organic 
substance,  77.03;  ash,  6;  nitrogen,  4.03,  and  phosphoric  acid,  2.07. 

The  refined  cottonseed  cake,  manufactured  chiefly  in  Marseilles,  is 
distinguished  from  the  former  kinds  by  its  lack  of  coarse  fragments  of 


1  Ann.  Agron.,  7  (1881),  p.  511. 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


101 


hulls.  It  is  of  a  yellowish  color,  broken  by  numerous  dark  streaks. 
It  contains  water,  11.26  per  cent;  oil,  4.80;  organic  substance,  78.76; 
ash,  5.28;  nitrogen,  4.43;  and  phosphoric  acid,  1.96. 

In  this  country  only  two  kinds  of  cake  are  recognized — (1)  undecorti- 
cated  cotton-seed  cake,  made  from  the  whole  seed  without  removal  of 
the  hull,  and  (2)  decorticated  cotton  seed  cake,  which  is  simply  the 
unground  cake  from  the  manufacture  of  cotton  oil.  The  former  is  not 
manufactured  to  any  extent  in  this  country  at  the  present  time. 

Undecorticated  cotton-seed  cake. — The  maximum,  minimum,  and  aver- 
age proximate  composition  of  undecorticated  cake,  compiled  from  all 
available  analyses,  is  shown  in  the  following  table,  together  with  the 
summaries  published  by  Dietrich  and  Konig,  Wolff,  and  Kiihn: 

Proximate  composition  of  undecorticated  cotton-seed  cake. 


Dietrich  and  Konig's  summary  (46  an 
alysea) : 

Minimum 

Maximum 

Average 

Wolff's  summary: 

Cotton-seed  meal 

Cotton-seed  meal,  cleaned 

Kiihn's  summary : 

Minimum 

Maximum 

Average 

Summary  of  all  analyses  (62) : 

Minimum 

Maximum 

Average 


Water. 


Per  cent. 
7.55 
14.  50 
11.86 

10.60 
9.80 

6.60 
14.20 
10 

7.55 
14.50 
11.64 


Ash.        Protein. 


Per  cent. 

Per  cent. 

5.03 

13.70 

12.51 

33.69 

6.38 

24.25 

7.20 

24.70 

6.80 

28.30 

18.20 

28.30 

6.80 

23.50 

4.33 

13.70 

12.  51 

33.  69 

6.26 

24.08 

Nitrogen- 
Fiber,  free 
extract. 


Per  cent. 

5.29 

25.59 

20.  95 

24.90 
18.40 


5.29 
27.17 
20.68 


Per  cent. 
24.20 
56.78 
30.74 

26 
29 

26.50 
36.70 
32 

24.20 

56.78 
31.43 


Fat. 


Per  cent. 
3.46 
9.02 
5.82 

6.60 

7.70 

5.10 
9.80 
6.60 

3.20 
9.02 
5.91 


Decorticated  cotton-seed  cake. — This  product  in  the  form  of  cake  finds 
its  principal  uses  in  England  or  on  the  continent  of  Europe,  very  little 
being  used  in  America,  where  it  is  always  ground  to  cotton -seed  meal. 
In  composition  it  is,  of  course,  practically  the  same  as  cotton-seed 
meal. 

The  maximum,  minimum,  and  average  composition  of  this  material 
is  given  by  Dietrich  and  Konig,  Wolff,  and  Kiihn  as  follows: 

Proximate  composition  of  decorticated  cotton-seed  cake. 


Dietrich  and  Konig's  summary  (429 
analyses) : 

Minimum 

Maximum 

Average  of  all  analyses 

Average  (28  analyses),  1870-1879 

Average  (401  analyses),  188)  to  date 

Average  of  all  analyses  (429) 

Wolffs  average 

Kiihn's  summary: 

Minimum 

Maximum 

Average 


Water. 


Per  cent. 
6.25 
15.60 
8.62 
8.76 
8.61 
8.62 
8.90 

7.70 
14.30 
10 


Ash. 


Per  cent. 
4.15 
10.08 
7.05 
7.29 
7 

7.05 
7.20 


Protein. 


Per  cent. 
34.71 
50.80 
44.09 
44.24 
44.09 
44.09 
43.60 

19.70 
43.80 
40.90 


Per  cent. 
2.14 
9.80 
5.16 
6.27 
4.93 
5.  16 
5.70 

5.40 
11.40 


Xitrogen- 

free 
extract. 


Fat. 


Pir  cent. 
13.15 
28.71 
20.  85 
19.62 
21.12 
20.85 
19.70 

10.50 
27.40 
15.80 


Per  cent. 
7.14 
21.05 
14.23 
13.82 
14.25 
14.23 
14.90 

5.40 
19.  70 
16.40 


102 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


COTTON-SEED   MEAL. 


Fertilizing  constituents. — The  following  table  gives  the  maximum, 
minimum,  and  average  composition  of  cotton-seed  meal  with  regard  to 
fertilizing  constituents  as  compiled  from  204  analyses: 

Fertilizing  constituents  in  cotton-seed  meal. 


Minimum 

Maximum 

Average 


Water. 

Ash. 

Nitro- 
gen. 

Per  ct. 
3.23 
8.08 
6.79 

Phos- 
phoric 
acid 

fst     8oda" 

Lime. 

Mag- 
nesia. 

Sul 
phuric 
acid. 

Ferric 
oxid. 

Per  ct. 

4.34 
12.57 

7.81 

Per  ct. 
3.35 
9.90 
6.95 

Perct. 
1.26 
4.62 
2.88 

Per  ct.  Per  ct. 
0. 87       0. 03 
3. 32         .  73 
1.  77         .  29 

Per  ct. 
0.27 
1.25 

.43 

Per  ct. 

0.48 

1.26 

.95 

Perct. 

0.07 

.40 

.19 

Per  ct. 

0.12 

.  19 

.14 

Insol- 
uble 
mat- 
ter. 


P.ct. 

0.02 

1.36 

.27 


Investigations  by  Kilgore  and  Noble1  have  shown  that  85.5  per  cent 
of  the  potash  in  cotton-seed  meal  is  soluble  in  water,  but  that  oidy  2.65 
per  cent  of  the  phosphoric  acid  is  available,  and  that  ordinary  methods 
of  wet  combustion  for  preparing  solutions  for  determination  of  phos- 
phoric acid  in  this  material  are  not  reliable. 

M.  B.  Hardin,2  in  a  paper  "On  the  occurrence  of  metaphosphoric 
acid  and  pyrophosphoric  acid  in  cotton-seed  meal,"  after  describing 
various  tests  and  methods  of  estimation,  says: 

All  the  reactions  seem  to  show,  beyond  any  reasonable  doubt,  the  presence  of  both 
metaphosphoric  and  pyrophosphoric  acid  in  the  aqueous  solution  of  the  meals 
examined.  While  no  quantitative  determinations  were  attempted,  the  qualitative 
results  indicated  more  metaphosphoric  than  either  pyrophosphoric  or  orthophos- 
phoric  acid.  Whether  pyrophosphoric  and  metaphosphoric  acid  exist  in  cotton 
seed  or  are  formed  during  the  preparation  of  the  meal  is  a  point  worth  investigating. 

The  phosphoric  acid  in  11  analyses  was  as  follows :  Total  phosphoric 
acid,  2.65;  insoluble,  0.16;  soluble,  1.66;  reverted,  0.83 ;  available,  2.49. 

Proximate  constituents. — The  following  table  shows  the  maximum, 
minimum,  and  average  composition  of  cotton-seed  meal  as  compiled 
from  over  400  proximate  analyses: 

Proximate  constituents  of  cottonseed  meal. 


Minimum  . 
Maximum 
Average  . . 


Water. 

Ash. 

Protein. 

Fiber. 

Nitrogen- 
free 
extract. 

Per  cent. 

5.29 

18.  52 

8.52 

Per  cent. 

1.72 

10.  62 

7.02 

Per  cent. 
23.27 
52.88 
43.26 

Per  cent. 
1.88 
15.15 
5.44 

Per  cent. 
9.13 

38.68 
22.31 

Fat. 


Per  cent. 

2.18 

20.66 

13.45 


COTTON-SEED   OIL.3 


In  the  early  history  of  cotton  in  this  country  the  seed  was  a  refuse, 
which  was  either  burned  or  thrown  away.     Its  products  are  now  among 


'North  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  91d. 

2  South  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  8  (n.  ser. ). 

3  See  also  article  on  handling  and  uses  of  cotton,  p.  365. 


V 

CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON.  103 

the  most  important  elements  in  our  national  industry.  The  oil  is  of 
course  the  main  product. 

By  far  the  larger  portion  of  the  oil  manufactured  in  this  country  is 
used  in  the  preparation  of  food  products,  principally  refined  lard  and 
salad  and  cooking-  oils.  It  is  also  used  in  the  manufacture  of  soaps 
of  various  kinds,  washing"  powder,  cosmetics,  to  some  extent  as  a  lubri- 
cant (when  refined)  and  for  illuminating  purposes,  in  the  manufacture 
of  bolts,  nuts,  etc.;  and  generally  as  a  substitute  for  olive  oil. 

The  tables  of  analyses  given  on  a  previous  page  show  that  the  whole 
cotton  seed  contains  on  an  average  from  20  to  25  per  cent  of  crude  oil 
(soluble  in  ether),  the  Egyptian  seed  being  somewhat  richer  in  this 
respect  than  the  American.  A  ton  of  American  cotton  seed  contains 
on  the  average  about  50  gallons  of  oil,  but  the  oil  mills  have  thus  far 
not  been  able  to  secure  more  than  45  gallons  per  ton.  Egyptian  seed 
yield  slightly  more  oil,  but  it  is  stated  to  be  of  somewhat  poorer 
quality. 

The  crude  oil  from  the  presses  contains,  among  other  impurities,  a 
peculiar  coloring  matter,  which  gives  it  a  ruby-red  color,  sometimes  so 
intense  as  to  cau.se  the  oil  to  appear  nearly  black.  This  coloring  mat- 
ter, together  with  a  large  proportion  of  the  other  impurities  ("mucilage") 
is  removed  by  the  process  of  refining. 

In  this  process  the  impurities  in  suspension  are  often  allowed  to 
settle  and  the  clear  supernatant  oil  is  drawn  off.  To  the  latter  from  10 
to  15  per  cent  of  caustic  soda  (10°  to  28°  Baume),  according  to  the 
nature  of  the  oil,  is  added  and  the  mixture  agitated  at  a  temperature 
of  100°  to  110°  F.  for  45  minutes,  the  precipitate  being  allowed  to  settle 
from  6  to  36  hours.  The  residues  obtained  are  disposed  of  as  soap 
stock,  in  the  manufacture  of  stearin,  etc. 

The  yellow  oil  resulting  from  this  process  is  further  purified  by  being  heated  and 
allowed  to  settle  again,  or  by  filtration,  and  is  called  summer  yellow  oil.  Winter 
yellow  oil  is  made  from  the  above  material  by  chilling  it  until  it  partially  crystallizes 
and  separating  the  stearin  formed  (about  25  per  cent)  in  presses  similar  to  those 
used  for  lard.1 

The  latter  constitutes  the  true  cotton-seed  stearin  of  commerce  and 
is  largely  used  in  the  preparation  of  butter  aud  lard  surrogates  and 
caudles. 

Another  substance,  improperly  called  cotton-seed  stearin,  is  obtained  by  distilling 
with  superheated  steam  the  mixture  of  organic  acids  formed  when  a  mineral  acid  is 
made  to  decompose  the  "  foots"  obtained  during  the  process  of  refining  cotton-seed 
oil  by  alkalis,  and  pressing  out  the  "  olein"  from  the  distillate  after  cooling  and 
solidification.2 

For  the  preparation  of  the  white  oil  of  commerce  the  yellow  oil 
obtained  as  above  is  shaken  up  with  2  to  3  per  cent  of  fuller's  earth 
and  filtered. 

1  H.  W.  Wiley :  U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Division  of  Chemistry  Bui.  13,  p.  412. 

2 A.  Wright:  Oils,  Fats,  Waxes,  and  their  Manufactured  Products,  p.  305. 


104  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Physical  properties  of  the  oil. — Cotton-seed  oil  is  twenty  to  thirty 
times  less  fluid  than  water.  The  refined  oil  is  of  a  straw  or  golden- 
yellow  color,  or  occasionally  nearly  colorless,  and  when  properly  pre- 
pared it  is  of  a  pleasant  taste. 

Specific  gravity :  According  to  Allen '  the  specific  gravity  of  the  crude 
oil  varies  from  0.928  to  0.930,  of  the  refned  oil  from  0.922  to  0.92G  at 
15°  to  15.5°  C.  Wiley,2  in  examinations  of  19  samples  of  refined  oil, 
found  specific  gravities  ranging  from  0.9132  to  0.9154,  with  a  mean  of 
0.9142  at  35°  C.  Wiley  also  reports  determinations  of  specific  gravity 
at  90  different  temperatures  (10°-100°  C),  showing  a  variation  of  from 
0.9249  at  the  lowest  temperature  to  0.8683  at  the  highest  temperature. 
Allen  gives  comparative  determinations  in  which  the  specific  gravity 
was  found  to  be  0.9250  at  15.5°  and  0.8725  at  98°-99°  C,  with  a  mean 
variation  of  0.000G3  for  each  degree  of  temperature.  Muter3  gives  the 
specific  gravity  of  brown  oil  as  0.917G,  of  refined  oil  0.9136  at  100°  F. 
(37.8°  C).  Sutton4  places  the  specific  gravity  of  cotton-seed  oil  at  from 
0.9225  to  0.9236  at  15.5°  C.  and  0.8684  at  99°  C.  Brannt5  gives  the 
specific  gravity  of  the  oil  as  follows :  Crude  oil  at  68°  F.  (20°  C),  0.9283; 
at  59°  F.  (15°  C),  0.9306;  at  50°  F.  (10°  C),  0.9343;  refined  oil,  0.9264 
at  59°  F.  J.  H.  Long,6  in  an  examination  of  2  samples  of  crude  oil  and 
of  4  samples  of  oil  refined  by  different  processes,  obtained  the  following 
variations:  Crude  oil  (1)  0.9325  at  3°  C.  to  0.9030  at  46.5°,  (2)  0.9290  at 
4.8°  C.  to  0.8994  at  49.6°;  refined  oil  (1)  0.9291  at  4.5°  C.  to  0.9014  at 
45.4°,  (2)  0.9312  at  2°  C.  to  0.9006  at  47°,  (3)  0.9295  at  3.8°  C.  to  0.9000 
at  47.4°,  and  ( i)  0.9322  at  0.7°  C.  to  0.9013  at  46.5°.  "  The  decrease  in 
specific  gravity  at  mean  temperatures  varies  in  the  different  samples 
between  0.00066  and  0.00068    *     *     *     for  each  degree." 

Solidifying-  point:  Brannt  states  the  solidifying  point  of  crude  oil  to 
be  27°  to  28.5°  F.  (—2.8°  to  —2°  C),  refined  oil  30°  to  32°  F.  (—1.1° 
to0°C);  Allen,  1°  to  4°  C;  Wiley,  "near  or  below  freezing;"  and 
Muter,  34°  F.  (1°  C). 

Befractive  index:  The  mean  refractive  index  of  refined  oil,  as  shown 
by  an  Abbe  refractometer,  was  found  by  Wiley  to  be  1.4674  at  25°  C. 
The  variation  in  the  refractive  index  is  stated  to  be  inversely  as  the 
temperature,  the  mean  rate  of  variation  for  each  degree  being  0.000288. 
Long  (vide  supra),  with  the  method  of  minimum  deviation,  using  a 
Meyerstein  spectrometer  and  hollow  prism,  obtained  the  following 
results:  Crude  oil,  1.4694  at  27.9°  C.  to  1.4624  at  46.2°;  refined  oil  (1), 
1.4744  at  19.3°  C.  to  1.4658  at  44.2°,  (2)  1.4736  at  18.3°  C.  to  1.4650  at 
40.2°,  (3)  1.4755  at  13.8°  C.  to  1.4660  at  39.2°,  (4)  1.4742  at  19.3°  C.  to 

1  Commercial  Organic  Analysis,  Vol.  II,  p.  112. 

2U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Division  of  Chemistry  Bui.  13,  p.  418. 

3Spon's  Encyclopedia,  II,  p.  1470. 

4  Volumetric  Analysis,  p.  344. 

5  Animal  and  Vegetable  Fats  and  Oils,  etc.,  p.  235, 
6Amer.  Chem.  Jour.,  10  (1888),  p.  395. 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON.  105 

1.4672  at  36.8°.  The  decrease  in  refractive  index  was  something  less 
than  0.0004  for  each  degree  of  rise  in  temperature,  and  was  not  very 
different  from  that  found  for  olive  oil  by  the  same  analyst. 

Crystallization  and  melting  points  of  fatty  acids:  The  crystallization 
point  was  found  by  Wiley  to  vary  from  30.5°  to  35.6°,  with  a  mean  of 
33.5°  O.j  the  melting  point  from  34.6°  to  44.4°,  with  a  mean  of  39.1°. 
Allen  gives  the  following  figures  by  Hiibl:  Solidifying  point,  30.5°  O.-j 
melting  point,  37.7°.  The  high  solidifying  point  of  the  fatty  acids  of 
cotton  oil  sharply  distinguishes  it  from  the  true  drying  oils.  The  fatty 
acids  of  linseed  oil  solidify  at  13.3°  C. 

Eise  of  temperature  with  sulphuric  acid :  This  varies,  according  to 
Wiley,  from  80.4°  to  90.2°  C,  with  a  mean  of  85.4°  0. 

Color  with  sulphuric  acid :  The  colors  produced  by  concentrated  sul- 
phuric acid  are  with  crude  oil  very  bright  red  before  stirring,  dark  red 
to  nearly  black  after  stirring;  with  refined  oil  reddish  brown  before 
stirring,  dark  reddish  brown  after  stirring.  Wiley  observed  that  with 
refined  oil  the  color  varied  from  deep  reddish  brown  to  almost  black. 

Chemical  properties. — Cotton  oil  and  oils  of  similar  character  are 
classed  by  Allen  in  the  "cotton-seed  oil  group."  This  group  is  inter- 
mediate between  the  olive  oil,  or  nondrying  group,  and  the  linseed 
oil,  or  drying  group,  since  the  oils  of  this  class  undergo  more  or  less 
drying  on  exposure  to  air.  As  regards  drying  properties,  the  more 
important  vegetable  drying  oils  stand  in  the  following  order:  Linseed 
oil,  cotton  oil,  rape  oil,  peanut  oil,  and  olive  oil.  According  to  Braunt,1 
pure  cotton-seed  oil  consists  principally  of  palmitin  and  olein,  palmitin 
being  separated  at  12°  C.  Gebek2  states  that  the  pure  fat  of  cotton 
seed  consists  almost  entirely  of  palmitin,  linolein,  and  olein,  and  is  for 
the  most  part  neutral.  The  presence  of  a  small  amount  of  linoleic  acid 
explains  the  moderate  drying  quality  of  this  oil. 

The  amount  of  glycerol  produced  by  saponification  of  the  oil  is  reported 
by  Allen  to  be  9.5  per  cent. 

In  investigations  by  Stellwaag 3  4.35  per  cent  of  lecithin  was  found  in 
the  ether  extract  and  1.52  per  cent  in  the  benzin  extract  of  cotton-seed 
meal. 

Cotton  oil  properly  prepared  is  generally  neutral,  but  Allen  states 
that  "cotton-seed  oil  expressed  in  England  from  decorticated  seed  often 
contains  so  large  a  proportion  of  free  acid  that  purification  with  alkali 
becomes  practically  impossible."  He  found  that  a  sample  of  oil  expressed 
from  the  decorticated  seed  in  Liverpool  "required  14.1  per  cent  KOH 
to  neutralize  free  acid."  Stellwaag  found  in  the  ether  extract  of  cotton- 
seed meal  3.24  per  cent  of  free  fatty  acids  and  92.89  per  cent  of  neutral 
fat,  and  in  the  benzin  extract  16.31  per  cent  of  free  fatty  acids  and  80.98 
per  cent  of  neutral  fat.     The  amount  of  free  fatty  acids  would  probably 

'Animal  and  Vegetable  Fats  and  Oils,  etc.,  p.  236. 
2Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  42  (1893),  p.  278. 
3Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  37  (1890),  p.  148. 


106  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

be  determined  largely  by  the  age  and  state  of  preservation  of  the  samples 
of  oil  or  meal  examined,  although  Eeitmair  has  observed  that  cotton  seed 
meal  kept  for  several  months  in  a  warm  laboratory  showed  no  change 
as  far  as  the  saponification  equivalent  and  iodin  number  of  the  ether 
extract  indicated. 

Gebek  found  0.058  per  cent  of  phosphorus  in  the  ether  extract  of 
cotton-seed  meal. 

Saponification  value:  The  results  reported  by  Allen  show  the  saponi- 
fication value  of  cotton  oil  to  vary  from  190.8  to  19G.8,  while  Wiley's 
average  is  197.7.  Wright '  gives  195  as  an  average.  These  figures 
indicate  a  close  relationship  between  cotton  oil  and  the  vegetabe  dry- 
ing oils,  for  which  the  saponification  value  varies  from  187  to  190.2, 
a  relationship  which  is  further  confirmed  by  the  iodin  numbers  reported 
below.  Stellwaag,  in  the  investigation  already  referred  to,  found  the 
saponification  value  of  the  ether  extract  of  cotton-seed  meal  to  be  194, 
of  the  benzin  extract  196.4. 

Iodin  number:  Cotton  oil  possesses  in  a  high  degree  the  property  of 
absorbing  iodin.  "  This  is  due  not  only  to  the  large  percentage  of  oleic 
acid  which  it  contains,  but  also  probably  to  the  presence  of  a  small 
amount  of  linoleic  acid  or  some  homologue  thereof.  In  the  samples 
examined  in  no  case  did  the  iodin  number  fall  below  100,  and  in  one 
instance  it  rose  to  116.97.     The  mean  iodin  number  was  109.02." 2 

The  limits  given  by  Allen,  as  shown  by  the  work  of  a  number  of 
analysts,  are  105  to  109.  Wright  gives  105  to  108,  with  an  average 
of  106;  Schadler,  106-107;  and  Benedikt  and  Lewkowitsck,3  collating 
from  a  number  of  sources,  102  to  117.  Holde4  in  investigation  of  the 
accuracy  of  Hiibl's  method  found  iodin  numbers  varying  from  110  to 
115,  the  higher  figures  obtained  being  ascribed  to  more  complete  satura- 
tion of  the  oil  with  iodin  by  the  improved  method  used.  In  studying 
the  ether  extract  of  cotton-seed  meal  Gebek 5  found,  as  Eeitmair  had 
pointed  out,  that  the  iodin  number  varied  with  the  purity  of  the  extract. 
The  extract  with  ordinary  ether  from  air-dry  material  showed  an  iodin 
number  of  96.5,  while  for  purer  extracts  the  iodin  number  was  100.8  to 
102.2.  The  iodin  numbers  of  the  fatty  acids  of  the  oil  are  given  by 
different  authorities  as  follows:  Schadler,  112  to  115;  Moranski  and 
Demski,  110.9  to  111.2;  and  Williams,  115.7. 

Keaction  with  silver  nitrate:  Another  important  property  of  cotton 
oil  is  its  power  of  reducing  silver  to  the  metallic  state  under  certain 
conditions.  A  test  based  upon  this  property,  first  proposed  by  Bechi 
and  since  modified  by  various  analysts/'  may  be  applied  either  to  the  oil 

1  Fats,  Oils,  AVaxes,  and  Their  Manufactured  Products,  p.  181. 

2  Wiley,  loc.  cit. 

3  Oils,  Pats,  and  Waxes,  p.  306. 

4Mitt.  konigl.  tech.  Versuchs.,  Berlin,  1891,  9,  p.  81. 
6Laudw.  Vers.  Stat.,  42  (1893),  p.  287. 
6  Analyst,  1887,  p.  170;  1888,  pp.  98, 161. 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON.  107 

itself  or  to  its  fatty  acids.  The  silver  either  forms  a  metallic  mirror 
on  the  sides  of  the  vessel  or  is  reduced  in  the  form  of  minute  black 
particles,  which  give  a  brown  or  black  appearance,  and  in  some  cases  a 
greenish  tint,  to  the  liquid. 

Cotton-seed  stearin :  The  process  by  which  the  two  products  which 
pass  under  this  name  in  commerce  are  made  have  been  briefly  described 
on  page  103.  Brannt  states  that  the  fat  separated  from  cotton  oil  by  chill- 
ing (to  43°  to  54°  F.)  and  pressure  is  palmitin.  The  melting  point  of 
the  stearin  varies  somewhat  with  the  extent  of  pressure,  but  it  is  gen- 
erally pressed  so  that  it  will  melt  above  30°  C.  Allen  reports  the 
following  figures  obtained  in  an  examination  of  the  substance:  Melting 
point,  32°  0.;  specific  gravity  at  98°  to  99°  C,  0.806;  saponification 
equivalent,  285  to  294.  According  to  Allen,  by  far  the  greater  part  of 
the  "cotton-seed  stearin"  of  commerce  is  simply  the  product  obtained 
by  the  distillation  of  "  foots,"  as  noted  on  page  103.  "  Products  of  this 
kind  appear  to  contain  a  large  amount  of  unsaturated  solid  fatty  acids, 
possibly  isoleic  acid.  A.  H.  Allen  found  that  a  '  stearin  '  of  this  kind 
had  the  specific  gravity  0.868  at  99°  and  melted  at  40°,  while  the  iodin 
number  was  89.9 ;  the  theoretical  value  for  pure  isoleic  (oleic)  acid  being 
90. 1."1 

Coloring  matter  in  cotton  oil:  Crude  cotton-seed  oil  contains  about  1 
per  cent  of  a  peculiar  coloring  matter,  referred  to  above,  which  is  sep- 
arated in  the  process  of  refining.  When  crude  cotton  oil  is  saponified 
and  the  resultant  soap  exposed  to  the  air  a  fine  purple  or  violet-blue 
coloration  rapidly  appears.  This  is  the  so-called  "cotton-seed  blue" 
which,  according  to  Kuhlman,  lias  the  composition  CnH^O.,.  "  It  is 
amorphous;  readily  destroyed  by  oxidizing  agents;  insoluble  in  water, 
diluted  acids,  and  alkalis;  sparingly  soluble  in  carbon  disulphid  and 
chloroform,  but  more  readily  soluble  in  alcohol  and  in  ether;  and  dis- 
solves with  purple  color  in  strong  sulphuric  acid."2  According  to 
Brannt,  the  unoxidized  coloring  matter  of  the  oil  is  insoluble  in  acids, 
slightly  soluble  in  water,  and  freely  soluble  in  alcohol  or  alkalis.  In 
its  dry  state  it  is  a  light  powder  of  pungent  odor,  brown  color,  and  is 
strongly  tinctorial.  According  to  J.  Longmore,  quoted  by  Allen,  it 
is  of  a  golden-yellow  color,  insoluble  in  water,  and  "  dyes  well  and  per- 
fectly fast  on  both  wool  and  silk."  Under  the  name  of  gossypin  it  is 
used  as  a  coloring  matter  in  the  industries.  It  is  stated,  however,  by 
Gebek,3  who  studied  this  substance,  that  it  does  not  make  a  permanent 
color  when  used  as  a  dye. 

TABLES   OF   ANALYSES. 

In  the  following  tables,  unless  otherwise  stated,  the  figures  refer 
to  upland  cotton.     These    analyses   have  been  gathered  from  many 

'  Wright,  Joe.  cit. 

2  Allen,  loc.  cit. 

3  Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  42  (1893),  p.  287 


108  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

different  sources,  and  where  the  number  of  analyses  is  large  their  aver- 
age must  represent  very  accurately  the  true  composition  of  the  substance 
in  question.  This  is  particularly  true  in  the  case  of  the  seed  products, 
where  we  have  grouped  a  comparatively  large  number  of  analyses.  In 
the  case  of  the  leaves,  stem,  roots,  and  bolls,  where  the  composition 
seems  to  depend  largely  on  maturity  of  the  plant,  the  average  means 
very  little,  and  a  great  number  of  analyses  will  of  course  be  necessary 
to  determine  with  accuracy  the  composition  of  these  products  at  differ- 
ent stages  of  growth.  We  have,  however,  inserted  the  average  in  all 
tables  in  the  latter  cases,  as  much  for  the  sake  of  uniformity  as  for 
what  the  figures  show.  It  may  be  well  to  state  here  that  in  many 
proximate  analyses  the  proportion  of  water  was  not  given.  When 
this  was  the  case  we  have,  for  the  sake  of  uniformity,  assumed  10  per 
oent  of  water  and  calculated  the  analyses  accordingly,  the  fact  being 
stated  in  footnotes.  Again,  in  several  cases  the  analyses  have  failed 
to  add  to  100.  In  this  case,  when  the  difference  from  100  was  0.5  per 
cent  or  less,  correction  was  made  in  the  nitrogen-free  extract  and  the 
analysis  included  in  the  average.  Where  the  error  was  greater  than 
0.5  the  fact  has  been  noted  by  inclosing  the  analyses  in  (  ),  and  the 
analysis  excluded  from  the  average. 

It  has  not  seemed  desirable  to  give  more  than  the  maximum,  mini- 
mum, and  average  composition  of  cotton-hull  ashes.  A  large  number 
of  analyses  of  this  product  are  on  record  (185  having  been  compiled 
for  the  purposes  of  this  article),  but  as  a  result  of  the  conditions  under 
which  it  is  produced  it  is  very  variable  in  composition  and  individual 
analyses  would  be  of  little  value  in  a  discussion  of  the  chemistry  of 
cotton. 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


109 


6 
izi 

.— i  w  co  ^*      io      CO      t*      oo  oa           ow           c^ 

co           -rr  10           ot-ooao      ~ 

<M          CO 
CM         CI 

m 
M 

i-t 
a 

a 

co 

f-t 

a 

CS 
DQ 

o 
a 

a 
t> 

e 
P3 

"a 

DH- 
ct 
02 

<E 

bD 

a, 

o 
O 

cS 

a 

« 

a" 
o 
ai 
t- 

© 

4jc 

H^ 

e 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

: 

c 

c 

: 

c 

c 

c 

d 

Insol- 
uble 
mat- 
ter. 

Rs 

6    . 

^ 

Sul- 
phu- 
ric 
acid. 

^ 

£'Ei 

&; 

c?g.2     !             1 

a 
3 

a,' 

c3 

o 

6h' 

ts-s 

■*^  0  co  »#  cd 

t>  ,-H  OWN 

•*  <M               CM  1ft                     CM               l«  CO               -^OO-h-TOOOCMCO 
i-li-l               00O                     i-l               IOO               -<*i— I^IOCOCMCOCM 

cm  cm           i-h  i-H           cm  cm           cm  cm           co'  co  co°  cm  cm      co      co'      co 

Phos- 
phor- 
ic 
acid. 

■w  -*  CO  Oi  OS         CO            '         00         CO  lA               O-^f               WC5               COCO               OCDHOiN         CO         CO         »-( 

«ooooot-      oo         •      t-      eoro           t-io           Ci  -^           ooirt           oo  co  co  c-  t-      oc      c:       c: 

ft^o  •  •  •           ;                                                     

^^  fee 

■*-i  OS  Cft  UO  00         i— t         00         --*         CD  t~-               OS  00               t—  -*               in  CO               CO  CO  m  in  t—         00         C-1         © 
C3  CO  "<*  CO  CO         C3         CO         00         00  Oi               CD  00               C500               (OQC               -^  00  ~H  CO  CJ         CI         t—         CI 

1*1,  CO  CO*  CO  i-H         CO         CO         CO         COiH               CO*  i-H               Co'i-4               CO  PH               CO  CO*  -^i  CN  Ol         co'         CO         CO* 

.a 

03 
«4 

>S 

— : 

c3  C 

^3 

r; 

Date 

of 
anal- 
ysis. 

1 1  § 
•    %%z 

g     0.2 « 

*■'    ?S  - 

a     a1"  S 

s   |-§| 

&     2  2- 

a 
Ph 

0 

0 

— 

4 

b 
p 

b 

— 

s 

■J 

s  - 

t  if..- 
o  fe 

-.-  - 

s 

D       t 
c- 

a 

0  1  b 

i.= 

o  i 

a.  z 

1 

■a 

'3  - 

■a« 
§1 

P-  - 

1 

~. 

DP,t 

—  » 

Sr.T 

O    i 

-  ; 
It 

D 

I 

; 
»^ 

OE 

; 

i 

o 

Pi 

^       b 

a     cs 

*     1; 

c^  i  * 

0       b 
blffi  - 

I 

I 
t 

a 

f 

— 

o 

9    * 

-  1  t 
■32  5 

P-.2  1 

) 

1 

i 

[| 

bi 

= 

13 
oS 

-a" 

IE     I    1 

d       b 

is-? 

at b 

§  2  c 

col'E 

h  —  5 
a  &5 

1 

6 

t- 
oc 

- 
1 

'3 

J2  1  8 

~  t  a 

III 

1 

0 

2 

0 

<0 
bi 
a 

bi 

e 
pq 

D 

eg 
bi 
a 

\~ 

a  t 
1  - 

:f.-- 
^    - 

CD 

D       bi 
c 

cc 

i  . 

l  i 

'0  ? 

-  a 

cj 

'E  * 

[  S   bt 

■2  .a 

pi  Z 

© 

o. 

ev 

-* 

•c 

cc 

t- 

OC 

a 

= 

c 

m 

-* 

m 

CO 

t- 

X 

CM 

CN 

CN 

CO 

110 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


d 

-hi  in           cot-           coos           oh 

CM  CM               CM  CM               CM  CM               CO  CO 

B 
CO 

-1 
cr 

CO 

CN 

Cr" 

Tfllf 

GO 

r4 
t-i 
CB 

a 

O) 

r< 

0 

IB 

o 

a 
a 
u 
<£ 

CD 

IO 

"3 

pq 

ci 

CD 
WD 
CD 
PI 
O 

O 

a 

a 
& 

ca 

b" 

o 
co 

u 

CO 

■a 

0 

-De 
H 

1-3 

c 

- 

c 

re 

e 

e 

C 

oj    .  2 

2  =  2 
°?^  ■ 

j^  cu       ^4 

Phc  SPQ 

■  a        A 
<*>  B  fl-g 

00        r     in    i    • 

1 1  l;« 

fl      _!      -f    •  ft 

<i     bf   ^  :  ft 
•    ©    p-  :.s 

CO         -W        ^      .    CO 

s   -2   3  :.s 

a  M    w  :S 

«r  .a    5  :  . 

co       bfl     CQ    :  d 
2      o      2    '  S 

ft   o    1  :3 

So    h     «  • 

<,    ph    h  :-« 

ft    s  ."g  :  -_j 

co    •  .„  in  r*-   .  5  ^ 

o    W    i-i  :w 

Insol- 
uble 
mat- 
ter. 

r; 

O  [-  rH         00 

i-H  •*  CO         o 

O     'i-i       cm" 

o  OO  cs 
H  O  OS 

'CN 

•*          -X          iHWt» 
in         -rX         CM  CM  t- 

r; 

o 
o 

©          rH 

-fl      •* 

-3  b  °2 

Ph 

tr-CM-H         O 
rH  CM  CM        a> 

O      *  r-5 

t--*  CO 
i-H  Tl  CO 

-HI         rH         CO  O  in 
CM         CM         HHCI 

r; 

in      co 

CM         CO 

o 

in  co  o 

CM  CO  CO 

•#      in 

CO         CO 

in 

CM 

r; 

CD  CO  ITS         -^ 
'f  O  i-l        o 
O      '  rt          r-i 

co  in  o 

■*  —  00 

O         CM         -*  O  OS 

-i*      ^x      co  co  in 

a 
3 

r; 

CMCO  O         CO 

oo  iraco      M 

O  r-i  -di          -J 

EHOHJ 

00  00  oo 

OS         00         O  OS  CO 

o      ^      r_-  co  o 

c8 

o 

CO 

r; 

HOD         CM 
H  -P        ■* 

t-o 

Hf  CO 

cs      -rH      co  co  in 

CO           IO           rH  rH  O 

Ph  8 

■w  oo  co         o  os         o  m         »-i  o 

«  OS  O                 <M  -*                 rll>                 tOO 

P^  ri  c4          co  i-3          co  c4          coco 

as      io 

t-         iH 
CM         CM 

rH  CO  CM         CO 
r-(  CM         r-i 

in  -h  oo 

O  CD  Tf 
i-i  CO  CM 

m         OS         CO  -rH  OS 
i-l          r*          COCO  CD 

Phos- 
phor- 
ic 
acid. 

*a  *h  ^               ift  OS               OO               COO 
«  00  t~-                 GC  CO                 00  CI                 00  t- 

r; 

■*         CO 

00         CO 

-H^  t-CO         OS 
Ttl  -r#  r-(           CO 

in  cd  co 

CO  -H  00 
CO 

t>      co      r-  -T*  oo 

CO          CO          rH  rH  CD 

.A  6  a 

*a  CO  ^                 COCO                 h--#                 lO  -* 
W00-*                 <M  O                 00  ^                 COCO 

^cooi           -*  ci           co  ci           -+  c4 

O         CM 

00         iH 

CO         C3 

.  in-*       in 

'nCC           CO 

t-m  t- 

in  CO  rH 
rH  tX  CO 

OS           t—           rH  CS  CO 
CO          t^          t-  in  rH 

3 

Ps 

t-r-cM      oo 

ITS  CM  co       m 

Tji  co  in      -# 

in  CD  CM 

O         00         rH  CO  CM 

■H      o      co  com 
cd      in      cd  co  co" 

r; 

m  co 

CO  OS 

Attics 

e 

«  o  a  so 

t-o  o      o 

IO0105         OS 
CO  00  00         00 

-*         OS  O  CO 
l>         00  OS  CS 
CO         00  OO  00 

111. 

°    ,a        ci  t 

V         a  : 

la       eo  £ 
H      O     ■  ttiZ 

i5    rim  2  J 
E    °  b  3- 

(5      cS 

C 

a 

b 

a 
b 

P* 

o 
rfl 

ft 

_,       a 
rs       b 

B       e 
B            a 

a    1    e 

fcjo3 .: 
t .-  -  ~ 

"3.8  5 

) 

0 

Q 

)  b 

i.l 
a 

b 
.= 

': 
Pt 

O 
,4 

ft 

a 

Dd        o 
i-    1   6 

'is'-  t 
o  «  ? 

Pt°  - 

°E  — 

) 

D 
3 
b 

of 

0 

b 

fl 

c« 

1    1    6 
o^  ! 
DA'S  , 

a  K  b 
©  o  c 

SrB    | 

) 

Q 

u| 

1 

pc 

fl  M<3  <B 

cS  «  is  bJO 

be      m 
hah" 

.O.B  O   bJO 
0     *h  rgti  d 

CD    b.    CDS 
bug   fcnTS 

e 

t- 

-^ 
es 

is   § 

;£  ^ 

•a      S 

•  J    § 

■  «        o        P 
!  ®        oo        P 

■g       ■•=        P 

•  9      a     -P 
,  :£    £     e 

■  a  p<  5 

ra  fl       fl 
.  3       fl 

■  o      o 

E 
- 
E 

s 

I 

< 

si 

£ 

1 

e 

c 

c 

c 

rt 

c 

CN 

> 

rC 

q 

c 

a 

c 
C 

6 
6 

•^ 

« 

if 

cc 

oc 

a 

c 
a- 

o- 

cs 

sr 

■?_ 

IC 

CN 

cc 

-t 

IC 

CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON 


111 


«t-oooo-HWr:-finat-oo 


qoqo^: 


1  Tf  l-  r  r-  oo  a 


in  o 
oo  c 

i—  o 

.  a 

«s 

O    O 

o  •- 

8H 

O  o 

H  9 


5     Cr 


•  (3 


a  p    r     So 

"IS     A 

j  o         ■     - 

5  w    •  fe  » 

b  "O    CD    H  iH 


O   ^   3   - 
o  o  H  o  I 

J-1  -—  <1  t>  - 


5o 


CD 


oJ      ©   -  off it:     ?cd 

"3  is'3.''    - S*  .  t^*3 

§  «o  5  £  p»--  g  y  s  o  s 

ftO     .  ,-h     .  Ha  J,  ,Q  "  in 

O         W     O     O     b 


C3  j_H- 

d-d 


c^t;:ooo  :  croc  cc  c  o 


OCOHrHCDh-CO«D-i^Wt-' 


^Hvt-HClH-H-iHOHO 


00C0OCQOHQ0CKH1OHH00 
HHC3HHCOHHHHCOCMCN 


O         i-l  o 


^Tn^os^iatoc  —  o  ~*  os  c  i 

OOOOOi-lO^-ti-li-li-lOW 


CO  CO  CO 


CI  i-i  rji  -t*  CC  O  CO  O  CI  C   3   O  X  I'  «  :i  CO  O  M 

CM  i-t  CO  lH  OO)  HHPlH-irlnHHHHr-IH 


CO  t^  O  -*  X  -  O  ^  O  O  -t  C5  CO  irt 

O         OOOOOfHOOOr-lOOiH 


IftHHOJ^iDCIOr-CO^OO 

iO  -*  co  -*  co  to  -*  co  -t  :  t  co  c  i  r  i 


ifiMHtDOCOOCOO'OOCOW 


O  CO  r—  CO  t f  rH  CI  O  t-  t-  lO)  •— <  CM  Ol 

ro  co        CO  co  co  -f  ro  l—  i.O  T  -*  ro  ro  cn  ci 


lO  ITO  O  O  CM  CC  X  O  CM  CC  CO  CM  rC  -f  CO  lO  (M  CO  CC 


o       o      co  ■ 


CI  CO  ^-  X  >■".  o  -  O  X  X  X  N  X 


LOic^icr^HciOjr-xxcoc: 

CQCOTHHOHHOOOOOH 


cs  -o         CO  t-  "•#  O  -— i-fiO-fCOXCO.— IX 
O-*  CO  CO  CO  CO  .— ii— 1-Hr- 1  CO  i— I  i-i  --h  -^ 


CO  Ci  O  CO  O  O  O  CO  tr f  LO  CO  — < 

ci  o  w  o  i*  h  x  'f  o  c.  c  o  r- 


|>  CO  CM  LO  W  CO  O  CC  OS  O  t-  lA  OS 

mcOCSiOCOCOCOiO,iOlO-#-^-f 


t*  H  lO  -f  C]  X  O  O  I-  t*  H  C<I  t^ 

ooii-iOJOiooxa3Lci»io-rf 


CM  CO  CM  lOO 


)  OS  CO  CO  ^H  O  CO  CO  ■-=*  i.O  CO  -" 

i  -*  co       socsccost^coeo^to 


'Ht-HCXOX'fXt fO 


CO  HO  tr-iO~tfuOCMOL-[ 


CO       -*  co       cocsococoxccx-^xcoo 

00         t-  CO         OOCOOClt't-OOOri 


i>  x  -^  ■*  h  c:  x  x  ic,  cj  x  r- 1  --      nroo 

Xr-nnOCWC-HClCl^NiO  OC0U0 

^^co^coi^^^^cococoeo 


3         O 

00 

OS 

CO  CO 
CI  CO 

oso— 'c;m-t-f-Jci-fi>t>(N 
ro  i-H  -+  os  t—  co  -#  co  e  j  -*  c-5  o  cs 

-*-*0 
CO  CO  CO 

0          CO 

^f 

CO 

-*co 

^'cdoco'cios«OLOirc)^rj3^co 

CO  OS  ■«* 

ooooooooooooo 

e_*Sj3  e  g  e  s_e  «  eeee 

OOOOO^^Hi-Hi-C-^i-IHi-t 

cs  cs  cs  cs  cs  os  cs  os  cs  cs  cs  cs  cs 

CCCOXXXXXXXXXXX 


OS         CO 
CO*  O  OS 


OOOOOOOOOOOOO         CO  rl  © 

c'S'S'S^'ccr'^'creee 


o  o  o  o  o  • 


CO  OS-  O  OS  CS  OS   OS   O.    CS   OS   OS   OS   ~    OS   OS   OS 

X  XX  OC   X   X   X   X    X   X   X   X    X   X  X    X 


CM  CM      -HTIOCQO      "COX 
i-*Cli"-t-*ClHCloOT-<COt~'-<CO 

Jjj'J  bjo  bb  feb  S  §  >>J>a  t>s  ci  bio  tfi 


CD©C&CD3,c;CU    —    CO    CD    <D    *   CD 

^^'o^^'o'o'oo'o'o'o  o 

aooau'j'j'jQ'j'j'jo 


50t*XOOHNfO' 


S.5 


>j  >.  ii  txi  tio  p  §  >i  >j  >-.  ti  ti  tic 

ooeo':'3o':';3",:o 


5  5  - 

-  -  bS 

-  =  « 


X  CS  O  — *  CO  CO  -rft  I 


I  CO  t-  X  OS  O 


112 


THE    COTTON   PLANT. 


"b 


Psg2 


3* 


rH         CM  CO         -HHtOCO         t~00©©rHCMCO-fiOCOt^CO© 


ofE| 


>  a  -S    i 


W  o 


bO    t>  _g 


■IS* 


arH 


"Fiijy  O^1?  ooooooooooooo 
«  t^^i"-~r-;T*    .T3.8  S  f  13 "»  *  *  « •«  tJ  *  tS  TS  1=  -o 

O      O         W      hi 


w 


ft^cM 


rH  CO  O  CO 


lO'+'f^owmfOHtDoinio 


©  CM  CM  OTfKDO'tClOIMMtOfO'^'* 


0,0 


h  o  •*  o  c;  o      -*  cm  © 

hhOhOh 


<£1 


-<#  00  (M         M-*ncOSCOOHONOt*t' 

oo  co  oo      oioiHxQOOMinoinos-^oo 


in  ^  m  m  .h  r- 

m  m  CO  ro  03  CI 


tn  la's 
£-g 


&,o 


CM         ©t»©HNON^O(0©M« 
^H         HMHHH^IHOI  CO.^  ■«  C4  M 


OlflCOh-MiO 
!-H  O  O  O  —i  CM 


CO  (DtOO  COQOOXCOCD®Ht-MCCO:i 

©         <M  C~  CM         ClOiNOJOCDtOOOt'OtOWX 


•^OOHXlft 
■Hi  T f  Tf*  -*  CO  CO 


«  UO        I.— 

fl^  Tji       cm 


oo      oo  o  oo      Hwt-HtOMinxm^ca^ 

CM    OHW    CO  CO  CM  CO  CD  00  CO  CD  t-  TO  00  UO  CO 


t-  CD  Tfi  iO  -*  CO 


lOlOlO-^TttCOCOCOC 


l>HO  HHtDmWOMONX-^HCO 

CO  CM  CO  N©CONNHNCONnP^HW 


CO  t—  l>  -H  CO  CO 

O  CO  O  CM  O  © 


«  CO  CO 

Q^cm      i-i 


0000tr-rHl.l0CO-#COrHOS©©tM 
iO^NN«DrOOO)^ttinX^ 


OO  -*  OS  CO  rH  rH 
OHOO^N 


rHrHrHrHrH(M<MrHCMrH--H.-HrH 


MWMHHH 


Pn  ft 


«©      ©  i-i 

l^rH        rH 


00         CO  CM  00         OWCO(MH{DkO-H((OWftt 


■H4  ■«*  ©         OXOt-(NOfiOI^O©OiO 


-**  ©  iH 


CO  CO  *■+  CO  N  rH 

HOOQXt- 


ftnrH 


©  CO  CO  CM  .-I  CM  OO  t~  lO  lO  CO  ©  CD 

co'co'coco'co^coccco'cocococM 


i-l        CO  ^  CO 
CM  CM  CM  CO* 


rH  ©  CO  CO  t-  © 
HOlkflOXt-  t-  rH  O 

CO*  CM  CM  CO  iH  rH  HJ 


<M  *C  00         OCiCMCOOOCMt-OOh'COCDCOCO 


OhS 


^  ©  CD 
CO  CM  CO 


©  (ft  CO  CO  ©  OS  rH  < 


■  ifl  t-  oo  as  t- 


cm  ^h  ir;  ^  i-  co 


H^TfliOlMMFHWHiH.-OHHO 


^  ©  © 

CO  CD  ^ 


©   T* 

OS  CM  ©  ©©©©©©©©©©©©© 


©©©©©© 


©©©  OOOOOHHHHr-HHH 

COOS©  ©©OS©©©©©©©©©© 

OO  00  00  CO  00  CO  00  00  00  OO  00  00  GO  OO  OO  00 


OOOO-H 
©©©©©© 
OO  00  CO  GO  00  00 


r*a  >i  bJD  bJD  bJD  S  a  >>  >>  >s  bJD  cfi  bJO 

j  ©  ©  ©  ■"  ■ 

bcoooocjocuoob 

CD©iOCD©©<D<DCD,3J©S© 


■00©©rHCMCO^#U0CDt-CO© 


ag 


;  cs  t> 


>s  bi,  bi  hi  bio  bi 

1-3  <j  <j  <j  "«f  <j 


o  o  o  o  o  o 


rH  CN  CO  t*  iri  CO 


5  5* 

c  M  a> 
SS-4 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


113 


"J     ° 


OS:-'73 


c-t       CM  £ 

o      in      in       g 

CO        00        00         ° 

fc    is* 

rC     •* 

(SPA* 

-*"      -*  3 

00 
-2         N 

-73       S 

PO  6     p,     a 

2a"3| 

«aj«    «     "4 

►.  is 

o 

fa  >>-s 

_;     _5,q 

Si   J3 

s    — 
«8  s  a  ,g 

O   -   O   X   O        4a 

O-3O«OO0Q 

a  o«ls  fag 

c3        ci"w 

■w     •  +=  © 

m  g  as  <g 

Og8n 

So  3  5 

ao  J  a:  s-, 

^  !£  t£ 

cc  t»  ad  g  cq  |  d 

3     tU     Cr- 

3  3   3   5 

5-7  SW 

UccsMbW  2 

M-Sm  o8 

%       CO 

Pin's 

o    .  a 

O^Z                  -        -        -fti             Mi       fa 

o£o.a      SoSSgS    -     Si*"  ft 

-  a  a  3  o 

3-          P,     ,    p,     .r- 

.        S8 
on     -rn     ■  Fh 

wiflHiOO 

H     H 

d    o    o    w 

l-=        1-5 

3.       3. 


•«  r 


■31 


;~H 


cc     eg 


.3   P.  N   3." 


'  p,flQ 


HH 


o      o      o      o 


CO         O         CO         <M 


O         rH        i-<        »-H 


t>        (O        rH 


iH  M         r-. 


i-l        O  O 


m        O  CO 


H  i-l  O  i-H 


t>  ci  ci 


-*      co      m 

»-i         OS         <M 


00         CO  00 


CO  CO  CO  CO  00  CO 


g  g  bo 

g  C  ti 

til 


1993— No.  33- 


114 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


j-f  <n      co  -t  m  co  t-  oo 


ceo  s 


-7  -^  '£  '3 


in  O  la 

co    .  co 

p.  p  ft 


s  si js 

coPh 

aj  Sad 

o 

p'£p' 


SOuOMO^.ai      & 


2-*> 


=  PS=-=p 


.p        0-1 


OS 
r  j5  'tii 
ee  5  ««  §  o 
MPnW^t?'^      Rfc§ 


o  P-  : 

*  gpq 

q  t- 
ftO  J 
"a!  *ai 

-3  P. 
c  c   i, 
Hhl 


S'rj  5W  §  o 
fe  P  p=n  P  p  t- 


Pi  H     . 
.  C  © 


"1       -* 


^  ft 


C3  -H    «  OS 

o 


?  jj  W  ^  m  r^  M  '"   - 


1-3 

-i  PfcH 

.  ft 


g* »?    - 

-  spw 

cm  i-s  (M  Ha  ci  r*     .,-    .  rq  m 

din  p.h  ftO^  ■  «pq £: 

P<     .    ft     .    P.     .  r-i      »  'A 

O      O      W      H      h 


-*  5  S  a  -S 
-  ■§  a  ©  r; 

h  « Wcfl  3 


K3 


'■-'  r«  *i 


a)  ci  ci 

•3.  g  & 


«H 


5  5  bH.,2 


R<o 


cr;      ci      oa 


A.O 


fetzi 


PhO 


cs  «  a 
3°» 


iffl       1-1       OS       to 


ft,d 


i-H  CO  ^*  i-h 


-*  -*         lO 


CO       00  CO  cs  10 

»-(         "M  CI  C!  ?l 


01       t-  .n  o  ci 

O         r-t  1— 1  C  1  C I 


ftnrH 


-f  CI  CO  t^  00  CI 
CI  <-l  O  O  O  CO 


^H         rJ 


tsin 


IO  CO  CO  -f  OC    X  w  CI 

O  CO  HHflrilOO 


■  t-  t^  t-  CO  CO 


I  OS        CO        -H        o        00        -^        CO 


XOit- 
cq  "^i  CO 


iH        10  O  Ci 


OQ-* 

ci  cicj 


oin-Tf 
t^  ci  cd 


OI>»ftCO 

COHTf   t^ 

HOHQO 


S.m-3  » 

o  °  «  £. 


00        00        00        CO        CO        00        00        coco 


co  co      cr.  x  x  x  r~  n 
t^  1^      x  x  x  x  n  oo 

0000      ooxococoooo 


o       0 


as 


te-4 


0-3 


"  d  o 

.ft -3  h 

q   K  o 

.a  ci  t> 


p  p 


iHCl        CO  T)t  in  ep  t>  CO 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


115 


rn:Nco-i<ioot--aoc:0^-?i 


)TflOtOt»COffiOH<SeOTjtlOtDNC0030i 
'Hr-lHHi-lHNWCM  T  I  M  (N  N  PQ  S4  C3  CO  < 


c 

a 

i 

3 

- 

3 

s> 
to 

eS 

§ 

P 

OS 

_o 

+3 

7 

* 
*- 
f 

Z 

& 
ci 
■f. 

s> 

q 

3d 

C£ 

7 

c 

7 

R5  = 

cj  =  S 

•75  3d  3d 

©   ©    CD 
X  X  93 


«»ajooooooi»oo+3a)00eyoosocoooooo30ocoooo« 
s  a  s^s^-- -3  s^  crs  a  9  fl-w-B  p'd'tf  P-otS'd'^'aTS'e'a  3^-5-3  — ^rrr;  a 


~3     tjj 

—    3 


33a 
o  o  c 

B 

O 

O 

a 

H  2  S 

o  u  o 
O      O 

Ej 

C 
O 

s 

- 

o 

.96 
43.30 
14.04 

1 

.-*      o 

CM         O 

"co  ih 

o 

2.41 
2.71 
2.56 

CM 

- 

- 

.92 
4.  93 

2.07 

O 

2.85 
17.15 

9.  97 

00 

.80 
19.  35 

8.85 

O 

o  eo'ao 

co  oo  ta 

o  t-  -* 

Th 

Ht-HHIOHU 

Q  ^*  ~.  Q  C5  X  C 

H  CI  H  t-i  i-i  H  Cv 

00 

o 

CM 

IT 

a. 

CO  -#         CO-tHCOSOCMCOOCT 

oc  oo      ococrir.  —  t- 

j-i  rA         CM  rA  ci  rH  ci  ci  r-i  r- 

to  co  co  er 

00  0C  OJ  ^ 

G>00C00)0>t~CAa000OCQC0 

cm  it 

-I 

CO 

H'tffflOHHOflJ 

io  a  o  't  "  co  -^  c 

^  o  o      noooa-^McaaiooOT^ooiAONHooin-^-^c 

t~  O  L~        Cl  ■*  t  CO  H  :)  f  X  L»  N  c  n  "  r^  m  n  Cl  c  o  o  ? 

oi  cm  ci      co  co  co  co  co  co  cm  c-i  ci  cm  ci  re  ci  co  ci  co  co*  ci  co'  co  er 

M  in  ro 

-T  rH  00 

ro  cc  r-i 

OO 

OS  CM  CO  .-i  Ci  CE  ~.  -*  CM  Ci  t-  rH         OOCOlO^CO^W-HHCaCgOIOmQQOONt-tf 
O  t>  t-  C-  O  L-  CC  t-  t-  O  O  t>         03M50'0t-t-l>300t-t-0ffl(-X00: 

m  o  c 

O  CD  •-} 

CO 

o 

in  c 

CM  0" 

35 

CI 
CO 

i 

W 

X 

-«f 

J 

H         E 
W         E 

£        •" 

O        E 

S       = 

- 

c 

a 

0 

a 

a 

H 

la     jjj 

a 

J      1- 

5       i 

a 

ooooooooc 


<  CM  co  «#  ir:  to  t~  oo  cr.  o  —  ci      ri-ricot-xcErHci^^i^^t-xooHcin-fio© 

Hrlr        HnriHHnHCi:i:i:i:i:i:i  CM  CM  cicocococccococo 


116 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


6 

co 

COCOr- 
CO  CO  "HI  ^ 

CM  CO 

4 

inat^xoiOHMmHiioiDt-oofflOr- 
HiHiHjTjiHiinmmioiflinioioioiniotc 

cm  co  -^i  ir 

CO  CD  CD  CD 

cd  i-  oo  os  a 

CD  CD  CD  CO  t^ 

1- 

CM  CO 

c© 

M 
u 

at 

a 

<s 

3 

DO 

o 
a 

03 

DQ 

tH 

o 

■a 
o 

IS 

«3    . 

09 

cd^ 

■3  s 

«?, 

+=■  a 

<D  2 

Jja 

,^-P 

S"S 

o  o 

oH 

r- 

1 

P£ 
0 
X 

a 

0 

4- 

cc 

-t- 

= 

c 

a 
I 
B 

c 

c 

c 

c 

o 

to 

00 
CM 

ft 

OS 
CO 

tf  J 

HI  +3 
<D  o 

3,a 

°  °  - 
a  o-c 

«5 

o  +" 
O 

CO 
CM 

P< 

OS 

E 
« 

30 

CD 

« 

-p 

4S 

o  c 

3^ 
O 

O 

ci 

CM 

A 

as 
co 

ft 
r^ 
(§ 

CD 

"5 
+= 

o 

C9    C 

o 
O 

c 

c 

c 

c 
1 

C 

c 

c 

c 

C 
~z 

c 

c 

C 
re 

e 

itf         rH       i 

a     3   ; 

5    5  : 
©   s  : 
^   2  : 

0  *  : 

"°  i  '■ 

'3d    3  ! 

o      3    • 

1  2  ; 

H       c3    • 

ja    o  ; 

3          H 

«      ! 

.2    rt  : 

«  .a  i 

-CO    O       ' 

<D    Ci       r~*            , 
C3            r    " 

ja  cs<q  o  e 

a "3  ■■*'= 
d   p  : 

'a 

a 

< 

CM 

00 

CO 

P< 

t- 

co 

CO 
CO 

si 

ci  o 

5  "3 

«3  o 

It 

CO 

in    i 
6    ' 

^  : 

-*    i 

K  '. 

H    ; 
pq    ; 
cs    ; 
55  ; 

CD      • 

1» 

Am 

a  a 
oca 
H    . 

r-JJl 

M  a 

P5  P 
.  o 

r,r^ 

e 

c 

c 

o 

-a 

Insol- 
uble 
mat- 
ter. 

Oi' 

CO  o 
O  00 

OS         CO  CM 
CM         CO  O 

a; 

Sul- 
phu- 
ric 
acid. 

CO         OCM 

O         ■*  CO 

CO         c~00 

O         OH 

£'Cg 

r; 

CO 
rH 

o 

•■*         CM 

fin" 

IO 

CO         -*CD 
CM         OCM 

co 

a 
3 

CJ 

r; 

cm      iraco 

CO         CM  OS 
O         rH 

CO         CM  CO 

c3 
O 

m 

r; 

CD 

o 

03 

tH 

H 

CO 

o 

d 

P4  § 

■"CD         OS 
»  05         CO 

CO         OS         CD  ^r  00  CM  -HI  rH  CO  O  00  in  OS  00  CD  CM 

in         -<*         00  OO  CD  OS  OS  OS  OS  C- t~  CD  CO  CO  00  CO 

r-<          rA  CM  r-i  rH  r-i  rA  rA  r-i  tH  1-3  rA  i-H  rH  r-i  rH  rA 

cm      minco-H^      hiooooio-hi^i    ■ 

CO        OCSnt-        CO  rH  OS  t- m  CO  00      ■ 

CO           rH       "  r-i  rA           CM  CM  rA  rA  rA  rA  rA 

Phos- 
phor- 
ic, 
acid. 

*5io       co 

«  t-         CO 

R^         -i 

OS         CO  CD  00  CO  -tf  CO  CN]  O  t—  t--  in  CD  in  O  00  t— 
t-         OOCMOSiHOH(OCOOOMMN(NCOtH 

rH         r-i  CO  IN  CO  CO  CO  CM  CN  CM  CM  CM  CN  CM*  CM  CM  <N 

in         OCDOSCM         lOMNC-linO©      ! 

co      oominco      oocodsmi-h    • 
co      cmcmcoco      co'cocococococo    1 

•A  o  a 

■"t-         i-t  rH  CO  CO          C0(DTt(C0(MOirM>n0lOlHHt-C0H00«C0 
^  Oi         t- O  00  CO         NiOOOtOmcONHWrtCOCOWHlMQO]^ 

kjco*      cot>cd^#      >#t>co*t>i^b^^i>t^r>i>i>t^t^c^^cDt^t^ 

CO  CD  CM 

cm  -^i  in 

co  in  in 

t*  CD  00  CM  rH  rH  -^1 

in  i-h  cm  -»ji  m  m  -hj< 

t^  CD  t~  t-  CD  CD  CD 

co 

r; 

- 

- 

- 

— 

- 

O         00  CM  O00         00  CO 

in      t-  o  os  -^i      co  o 

oo'        [^  t-'  OS  t>        t>  l> 

r; 

O  CD  O 

oo  cm  m 

t>  00  OS 

Date 
of 

anal- 
ysis. 

:  C 

c 

c 

_0 

: 
~z 

e 
-a 

•i  1 

a    ■ 
t  i 

n 

£ 

c 
r 

■s 

c 

e 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

e 

0 

e 

"5 

e 

z 

rz 

e 
- 

X 

e 
— 

£ 

c 

c 

rz 

c 

z 

0 

c 

d 
ft 

cr 

a- 

c 

t 

CN 

<4 

-^ 
■< 

1C 

CO 

OC 

E 

ur^ 

1£ 

ic 

in 

in 

CO 

1-1 

a 

IC 

e 

CO 

5 

CM 

CO 

CO 

9 

IT 

CC 

t^  OC 
CO  CO 

ir 

CO 

CO 

t^ 

CM 

CO 

CHEMISTEY    OF    COTTON. 


117 


^irt©N000)O^NM^WOt^C0C5O^«W^Wt0l-XC.  Or-7)cO'fL';'Ot^OCCJOHNm'^if5COt>OOCC^:i: 


■NOOOOWQOQOOOOOOOOOOOOOJQaaOJOOiQOJOOOOOOOOCO' 


•  CJ  CI  CI  CI  CI  C3 


X 

F< 

a 

a 

0 

IE 

CN 

|K 

D 

— 

a 

s- 

X 

a 

'Z 

T 
-^ 

e: 

P 

t- 
a 

c 

a 

r 

a 
a 

? 
- 

a 

o 

PC 

-7 

_ 

7 

d  cj  cj 

COO 

;Mffl 

815 


;ooooooo-=oooco-sooooooo-scoooo'Sococcoo 


0 

o 

1-1 

O 
Hi 

o 

Hi 

5 
Hi 

— 

s 

X    X    7 

S  «  r 

X 

s 

■«#  m  w 

C-  -rf  (M 

cooif)cao»t>i>c0ioaoo»t~<0cecQ 

oooon-tooo-fLici 
^fiot-CMco:o»-<so-'#co 

osoceTsoco-i'uo^b-oOTti-fcceoc-'JC'i^-ro^ 

c 

c 

er 

if 

cr 

ex 

CI- 

er 

c 
— 

c 
If 

-t 
e 

er 

e* 

a 
er 

CN 

er 

er 

cr 

if 

if 

cr 

-i 
cr 

if 

cr 

X 
IT 

cr 

« 

a 

c 
cr 

c 
cr 

e 
ec 

er 

at 
if 

cr 

0* 

CN 

cr 

0- 

-t 

CI" 

CN 
IT 

er 

EC 

c- 

T 

cr 

»r 

a 

a 

cr 

■H 

er 

c 
er 

IT 

CN 

oc 

cc 

oc 

IT 

OC 

X 

c 

er 

— 

e 

oc 

X 

•5 

-x 

CO 

c4 

io  to  -f  o  cv^;  ui  ci  o  t^  -h       -t  :i  *.  -fci  oo  co  lo  ffl  o  co  t>  rt  ri  r:  c  u*;  -f  :i  ^  oo       co  m  as  m  o  . 


i  o  r:  -#  l-j  «  x  i-1  -  c  t^  cc  • 


«HOHHMTfOiOlM  Hft*0)0iOCCHnC0C0^CO(>XOOHH^00         L'-.in-tOCOWXCWOOCO'l'Xt-HgH 

t>  CO  L^  CO  l*"  CO  l>  t>  CO*  t>"  t>  t>  t^  t>  CO  r>  CO  CD  c^  t>  t>  cd  CO >  CC >  iO  CC i  to  b^  ^"  l>  «  »  o  t>  ^  iri  t^  1^  t>  t^  O  O *^  t^  L^  t^  o "^  t^  t^  ^  t^ 


C.  CO  [^  r-il*  CKO  O 
.  X  t-"  OS  ©  CO*  CO  CI  OS 


t>l>-t-t>t^l^CX)C0C000C0CCC000C00005CftO  C.  Oi  CD  cr.  C.  05C1OOOOOO©   — ■   3   O  H  H  ^h  H  H  ^*  «  p-  r-  i-  CI  CI  M  W  CI  N 


118 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


°  s  a- 


M.p,   cS 


e8  ».g 


°  o  o2 

^  p.  «a 


NciwMcococommmco      cc  co  c: -+  -f  -*  -t  -*  -*  -*  ■•#  -*  -+  »n  >ci  lo  io  lt  m  tr.  tr.  i-  io  '^  '^  -j  cc  c  (o 


<N 

P.  • 

a 

OS 

•^ 

4^       ' 

4J 

P,      ' 

m  : 

W 

C4     ' 

CS 

w   • 

7J 

<c    • 

<D 

c3     • 

S 

32    ; 

m 

D 

P 

^  : 

,p 

.2  ii 

COX' 


II  :| 


O  O      ■  iH 
~.  OS   »  Ol 


02  M 


Six 

r  » 


O  a] 

o  P 


□0    GG 

,5.5 

1  o  «  « 

:8S 


oo  co  io  t>  t>  oo  r-  o  ci  o 

-r  ^H  OS  t>  c-  Ci  O  CM  t-  O 


q  ^  h  h  h  co  :i  x  o.  i- 
-r  ci  re  :c  re  re  -t  co  ri  to 


IO 

MS 


:  :  o  c  ocH^c^c  o  o 

a ^  -^ 


CO 


Pa 

&  ci 


■w  -f  (M  CD  O  rH  c;  t--  CO  CM  CO  ' 

«  W  O  O  CO  N  00  X  Q  O  CO  : 

fij  W  H  CI  H  H       '        '       "  CI  H  - 


h  «  co  im  ©  o  i>  oo  o  o  h  w  in  "X  *i  in  co  o  n 


o  o  o  t-  --+  -#  C 


■CMOI>CMC;[>CMt>lCH 


ClMCMrHi^i^rHrHi^CMOlrHCMi^rtMr^lCNJCM 


'LOOOH-li-  O  CI 


cooowHHooNcoHnnMomi>ioxomocoHv^ 
cM?iCNci:o**wo«LOcccoHi>MHr-iincMir.  xooxo'tcosmio 

cocoM«^coeocQwcococqcocqc4c«coNcocNiciic 


h-  OS  t—  H  C  -f  CT.  «f 

X'Xr- i  lO  00  OS  OS  O0 


CM  CM  CO  CM  CM 

-3<  CO  co  to  lO 
CO  CM  CM  CM  CM 


^-^  far. 


1  OS  ^H  O  CM 

j  io  ■**  -t  t-^ 


r  OS  OC  CO  CO  CM  CM  OS    ^-tXt-OTfCOOJ- 


co  OO  OS  IO  CM  t—  lO 
CO  CO  tO  CD  t^  CO*  CO* 


■  lO  O  ■+  X  W  O  '-  X'  C  M  Tl  X'  CI  X  CO 


CM  CO  CM  fc-  IO  Ci  O  iH  t-  OO  CO  W  CO  -*  r-t  IO  CM  0O  *0  »»  ^  t>  O  CO  O  iH  t-  O  C 


>?moHcooot-t"foci 
^>  -ji  cr  j  t~  cm  co  ro  t>  cn  ^  io  co 

'  oi  o'  i>  co  co"  x  »rj  to  oo  d  h 


Ri»S' 


CO^CX)OCMCOCOCOI>IOCO         HiOOlflXX 
OS  00  CM  O  CO  t>  lO  00  t— I  CO  00         t-  00  CM  CO  t^  *■* 

t>c»i>i>co"coco^co"^ioi>co*i>co"ci6i>co 


c=  co  oo  io 

00  CO  t>  CO 


■  tr-  CC   X  X  OS  O-  OS  c  o 


.  x  x  x  x  ->:  x  x  x  os  os       os  rs  os  os  —  : 


i  r-<  cm  cm  cm  cm  r  i  ?i  m  cm  re  rcc  r:  re  re  re;  r:  oo  **  -f  io  to  i_-s  10  x  ti 


J  OS  CS  OS  CS  OS  OS  OS  os  os  —    X    X   X    X    X    X   X  00  OS  O  OS 


.   X  0C  00  X    X   X  X  X    X    X         OC  00  X    X    X  X  CO  X   X  X    X   X   X    X    X    X  X    X  X    X    X  0^  X  X  X   X  X  x  CO 


cprr-oposo^eiro'^ioco       t-xc 


co  ro  co  '*-*-+**  ■ 


Hoiro^mcot-xoso  —  :i  r:  -f  l-  o  t-  x  o  c  ^  on  «  ^  in 


:  io  o  uo  »*  i-  io  co  co  so  co  co  co 


CHEMISTRY  OF  COTTON. 


119 


CO  l>  00  05  O  -<  N  n  "*  O    O  t^  X  *  O  -  M  r^  •+  i'  ^  h  X  C  O  ^  M  «  -t  o  cd  r-  X  C~.  O  — <  CM  ~  -^ 

—  - )  o  o  o  o  © 

i  c  j  -M  cm  cm  cm 


w  ^  ^  :d  l-  t-  t>  t~  t-  l-   t-  t—  c—  t~  x  x  x  x  x  oc  x  x  x  x  c:  o:  c-.  s:  ct  -  *.  r.  r.  -  c  c  c  c  c 


o      ; 

o 

a 

P         ; 

CD           ^ 
X          i-l 

x     x 

h    .  t- 

CO  t> 

COQQ 

cs  ce 
xtx 

c 

C 

^ 

c 

c 

1 

"3 

CO 

c  c 
o  — 
c 
rffl 

CM 

« 
C3 

CS 

X 

o 

CM  CD  t- 
O  CO  CM 

- 

- 

- 

Mj 

t-  o  <?s 

O  ■*  i— 

- 

M  C3S  ^ 

COCl^ 
■"*  CM  C5 

<M  in 

CC  CI 

t-lO  CO 
CM  CJ  x? 

O  L^  M 

oo  in 

CMCC 

CO  t-  X 

CDlOHifi 
cc  t-  ~.  X 

5 

-  fC  ?1  ^  (X  CM  CM  X  C 

iflifi^cxxb-ir.t- 

O  X  -*  c- 

ctNot^cxiiacojii: 

CO  t-  o 
c~  cr.  lO 

X  CO  t> 

2 
CO 

CO 
CM 

ocot'O^^oDO      t-L^"-C'tiCHci?;c;t-iooctr''jt"i,LCi>r;cc-+t*LCCO 
c-i  o-'i  oi  Co'  ci  ci  cvi  cni  <-^      ci  o  i  cn  cc  c*l  c4  co  c-i  cm  c*i  c<i  c*i  c^i  co  c-i  ci  cni  o-i  c-i  c-i  ci  c-i  c-i  c-i  oi  ci  c*i  co  oi 

O  CM  X 
CJCOX 

i-i  tJICM 

tc?  co  c-i  ci  -+  t-  10  o  ^*      lo      cOHt^c.  ni-ccxoH      i>ccci^c:Tfr-t^oor-T-Nwor;c 
XHxx-iH?ixn      02      o  o  o  <n  co  o  .-i  o  ^<  co      occHWfKiXMCo^iCH^ic 

CO  X  S3 
M  O  l> 

3.  35 
9.90 
6.  Oo 

7.65 
8.55 
8.28 
8.16 
9.12 
8.89 
7.46 
6.63 
0.90 
(8.84 

7.  45 
7.80 
7.  79 
0.17 
8.55 
0.89 
6.52 
9.36 
6.98 
0.70 

7.  79 
6.13 
7.18 
8.35 
8.36 
7.94 
7.96 
7.67 
7.74 
7.05 
8.05 
6.45 
8.22 
7.65 
5.  57 
8.96 
7.08 

8.  05 

co  m  x 

-*CM  l- 

c  cr.  c:  ~.  —  cc  ~.  ~.  ~.  r;       ~  ~  ~  ~.  ~  t.  ~  c-.  cr.  c-.  or.  c.  ~.  t.  ~  ~  c;  r;  ~  n  <r.  *  -  ~  r.  *  y.  x  i         •     .    . 

CO  CO  OC  X  X  X  X  CO  CO  CO         X  X  X  X  X  X  CO  OC  OC  OO  X  OC  OC  X  X  X  X1  X  X  X  X   X  X   X   X   X  X  CO  00            ■      ■      i 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

,.....do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

....  do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

Minimum 

Maximum 

■~ 

cc 

CO 

-~c 

t> 

r- 

CM 

I- 

£ 

t> 

IQ 

cc  b- 

t> 

—  c 

t-   X 

X 

(M 
X 

OC 

X 

X 

CO 

X 

X 

00 

00 

--- 

~. 

CM 

~- 

~. 

— 

■s. 

00 

— 

r. 

M 

IN 

o 

ci 

ro 

= 

CM 

cc 

. 

120 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


"*  m        CO 


i-H?»ieo.**iocot-aoas©»H<MroT»«m 


6 


-g 

CD 

pq 

H 

M 

+=0O 

50 

ft 

i 

ft 

3lO  ffl 

O 

ft°  £ 

cqH  to 


cow  fl co 

c3    •  o  eS 

O  _  a  o 
-   -        ~ 

<S  Cm   c3 
■+3  "  ^3  -P 

^  o  2  h 


H3 


o  ®  g 


CO  ^  IM  Ol  Cl  CC  «  O  ©  ^  ^  *t  C.  i'.  i - 
HH^lflH-^Ob-Oll-aH^t-W 

CNCJCNCNCNr-icNi-i      *OJi-icNiHrH(N 


coior-Moscocc-tcoin^HH^ 
irsaootot^wcoHcoH^^icoo 

**ji  rH  ■**  co  i-3  O  -*  OS  CO  OS  cq  uo*  co*  t>  ■«* 

erccococococococ-icocorocccococo 


-j  -f<oo  OS 
73  os  co  o 

*  o  cp  CO 


;  os  '-Hci 


.  ir:  ro  -t*  co  o  m 


i  ci  oo  co  iH  » 


)lOlO(MHb-HO) 


>ia  cm  t 


lOlOH 

co  co  -** 


O  CO 
CO  ift 


©■fHt^Oh-iOClrtulXOiOOC'l 
O  O  O  CO  N  CO  t>  00  ©'CO  ©  CO  <■*  04  OS 

^t>coiot>toioa>cdu£coeQ^eocN 


OS  00  © 

S^  OS  iO 


*  CM  l>  OO  -"#  tH  r-t  CO  C 


J  Ift  OS  00  <-i  *■+ 


rtiflCOHOOONt-HNNTjlMiO 

coeD^^eo'^oot^-^-^TjHcocococo 


ONTt 
co"  t^  ^ 


t>ooooooo  ooooooo 


OSOOOOOO^»-lrHT-HrHi-H'-*W 
OOOSOSOSOSOSCSOSOSQSOSOSGSOSOS 

oooococoooooooooooaoooooooaoQO 


CO 
>  CO  CM 

j   0J   <D 


-  -co 

O  rH  C>1 

bibibjb 


CM  -M  ^  CM  CO  c 

;  CQ  iH  CM  ^  ,H  CM  "^  CM  CO  r-4  CM 
«  >*>>  >s  bio  bi  bi  g    Sj^J^fc 

g  O   C    1    -J    O    ■.     Jj    S    S    i    K    S    S    Jl 

^ooooe'oo'o'o'oooo'o 

HCim^iociocoajOHiMw-^in 


33, 

2   3  O 

g  S  <a 

a  x  a> 
■m  ca  p. 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


121 


CI  CO  -<*  in         Ot>QOOSOHMW         'H*  m  CO 


leirt-innci 


o  s- 


sa 

°  a 
7. — 

CD 


■Sjd     •       h. 

S  °  =       K 


tig -a  ■§•§ 


H      ® 

.     H 

S      OQ 

a 
ffl 
a 

2*«  s. 

0 

—  :-  =- 

D 

«i  3'5 

.2^.2  g-2  :   :.s§.S  '   '   ■   • 


a  a 


HS 


O  «  t^  1<  Ol  ift  W         COtOOO 


HHHH         NNHHNHCQfN  Ht 


■**<  t-~  i>  cs      winoii>«it-Hio 


owt-oo      Nt-iaN^c 


-—<  o  o  m      o  05  m  co  «d  a -h  co      Tfifiift 

CO  CO  CO  CM         COWNWCOCOCOCO         co  co  co 


MtDOfflOiHLOt-fflOJ^OOOO'fN 

lococoacocoooococu^^'xioo 
cp^^^io^t>co"in*(dco*t^eocooo" 


NHO^«mt-«o*t- 


it-^MpJHOOHOiOii 


co-fco-+csmt— cot-t-t—  iot*x-t 
■^cococowcococococoMcjroco'* 


ClOOO 
CO  CO  CO 


t-  «-H  in  t-  O  -f  M  ©  -t  -I  lO  H  ***  -H  CO 

CO  CO  CO  r-i  CO^OlCOCOOO  Ift  t>  i-H 


ONHQO  t-  OS  CM  lT~ 'HH  CO  OS  CO         iMiNlft 

T*  •<&  -*#  -*      ^ -^  co  co  co  co  co  co      >#  m  rp 


■•*  05  o  -*  co  m  - 


1  in  cs  1— (  as  cs  c 


o©Ht>t*HOHi*coir,Nt-osin 

O  CO  C0*  iH  CO*  CO  CO*  <-h  i-5  i-H  cm*  iH  cm  i-H  OS 


m  ^h  m 

OS*  OD  CM* 


cs -*  m  cm  co  o  o  co      t^ioo 
^o-voHtomH      co  cm  cs 


O  ©  OS  o 


»©OHHfflOO 
Mt-(  ^        rHrH 


COCOCO(r--H-COCO"^OSOSt>CO'*00^ 

ot^int^ooO'tOHiNHooiat- 


in03"-rCOCMOCSCO-HHCOCMCMOaOCO 
rHCMCMCMCMCM»-HCNCMC^(MCMCM^-rH 


CO  OS  O  rH 


1  -t  »h  oa  «■#  t>      o  cm  as 


OSC^CO^COCMTftCM 

cocNcs'co'inin-^'^ji 


^CCOOSCMcOCOCMtr~CSt--COCOCOCO 

CMCOOOSCOCOOOS-— coint^aoost- 


<  co  ^  ^  in  cm  co  * 


I  CM  .-H  1-1  CO  i-H  • 


0000   00000000   000 


000000000000000 


OOOO   o  o  • 


i  CS  OS    OSOSOSOSOSOSOSOS    OS  OS  CO 
CO  CO  CO  CO    CO  CO  CO  00  CO  CO  CO  CO    COCOCO 


OS  o  o  o  o  O  O  f 


cccsoscscscsosoc.csc  cr.  cs  as  cs 

-ICOCCCOCOCOCCCOOOOO-XOOCCOOCC 


si  si  £  2  _>>  >._>>  si 

CD    ©    CD   ©  CD   CD   CD 

a  o  o  cd      o  o"S 


>-.  s*^.  si     sisi£2>i>.  >isb  si  si 

S3  5  5        2  2  3  3SS52  2  2 

a -a -a 'OS 

CD   CD    CD   CD   CD  CD    CD 


CD    CD    CD    CD  CDOCDCDCDCDCDCD  CDCD 

ejooo       oo  a  o  o  o  o  s       o  o 

CD   CD    Oi    CD  CCCDCDCDCDCDCDCD  CDCD 


El 
2  5  sc 


aa«4 


laa-^aaa^aa^s 

™  ,&■  >i— •  ^Saq  ir-ir-i?  ij  y  '* 
Prt  •a'a-a-a-a'a'a'e'e'a'a'a'a 

CDcDCDCDCDCDOO,    1.    CD    CD    CD    CD    CD 


&  . 


CD  CD  C  CD  CD 


S  CD  CD  CD 


CD  CD  CD  CD  CD  CD 


S  a  3 
2  a  M 
=  =  a 

a'S  3 

.S  cS  f* 


©©aJCJCi-CSiDCD 


jS'o'o'c's'c  c  oo"o':'oc'oo 
300000000000000 


cm  co  ^*  m        CD  I—  CO  OS  O  ^H  CM  CO        -t  m  CO 


riClrt'tlOCOOOaOHlNCO-tiCi 


122 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


CI  CO  -^  in  CO 

o 

00 

CM  CO  ^  ITS  CO  t-  00 

OS 

o 

rH 

CM 

£ 

o  >. 

+i  S 

tc  {a 

c  >. 

AH 

-1  c 

.    CD 

9 

oo 

^      H 

s  3 

K    CO 

cr 

A 

06 

K-   'S 

to 

a 

h 

»H 

g  cu 

2 

^ 

CD' 

73 

^  ic 

5-5 

3 

g 

CD 

c3 

u 

CD 

.  u 

O  s 
irf'P 

c 

i^d2 

HcS 

H-j 

^ 

tz 

cc   - 

rH  r^. 

a  a 

i 

a 

.  CD 

CO  CD 

S3 

M 

t- 

in  0 

CD 

CD 

CD 

pq 

> 

CD 

p 

CD? 

3  V 

r^ 
CD 

CD 

M 

CD 
H 

03 
02 

IS 

r 

bi 

"3 

:o 

M 

a's 

*  Pi 
Ocf 

«3r& 

D-    ll"^ 

'& 

R  ? 

O     r- 

1-5      - 

— 'r—  CI 
>    -  CI 

2  o  o  o  o  c 

a 

•Sooooooc 

!•§ 

w  2  Otf  O  O 

re's  ^Th-Ot: 

e 

^■S'd'S'S'O'St 

.8 

p 

a 

CO.— 

o— < 

£1!^ 

a 

E- 

5 

Ch 
00 

<1 

^coin^ocDt^ 

not. 

a 

^ 

■fHQXOOTC 

o  -^  -« 

o      oo 

g  C-  00  o  t-  r-  oc 

t-  t^  c 

cr 

1        tt 

mr-^ooct-mT 

■^  CO  OS 

I-1 

-1           CM  rH 

ca 

§j  C4  CO  CO  00  CM  CM 

CM  00  -r* 

1 

cs  t-  o>  i-  -*  -t  in  c 

1  o  cr.  os 

CO 

©         CO  t- 

Ph 

^ 

1 

Cl-.rtHrt«(Mi- 

rH  CM  1-1 

C!          rHr- 

& 

I 

1 

o  m 

00 

R           4= 

■«  w  co  io  10  o  a 

in  O  C 

c 

a 

oo  o 

m  cm  co  oo  c: 

o  o 

g  00  l>  CD  ao  CO  O 

W  CO  CO  -O  CO  ■-*  CT 

COCO  Tt 

co  -+  ir- 

c 

1        "" 

t>  CO 

I'HCOOCC 
CM  00  O  O  r- 

IC  t^  rli 
C-  CO  CI 

s 

CO  00 

t~      oo  cd 

.     ^  CO  CO  CM  CD  ur 

CM  CO  tJ 

c- 

CO 

CO  CM  CM  C-1  r- 

CO  CM 

CO 

CM         CM  CM 

73 

»    « 

& 

ll 

°G 

CD 

■W  -M          CCCO-Pf- 

TfOf 

c 

OS  ~i< 

CO  O  CO  CO  c 

CO  O  CO 

HI 

o      o  o 

a 

r-i 

CD 

r=j 

£  Oi        OCOOCs. 

o  *f  co  oi  6  t>  c^ 

O  CO  l> 

t^  o  a 

IT 

CN 

cv 

CO  t^ 
~*  OS 

^r-occc 

OS  Mi  -f 
OO  CI  CO 

CM 

CO         CI  00 
l>       os'  OS 

^wwco    <- 

CO    7- 

cr 

a 

CM  ^ 

CM  CM  CM  r-1  CT 

CI 

>5 

s 

U 

ts 

CZi  O 

a 

so  CO  CD  CO  CO  CO  IT 

ic  oo  cr 

CC 

c 

i                        CO  CM 

-*  OO  o  -+  c 

CJ  O  CO 

CM 

c 

'3 

£  -rf  CD  CO  Oi  J>-  CC 

co  -*  oc 

a 

|                       t-CO 

■^  oc  io  os  F 

CO  t—  iQ 

rH            CO   -# 

u 

'5 

•O  OS  CO  1(0  CC  i— "  c 

O  OS  ir 

cc 

(M  CO 

its  co  cr.  cs  a 

CO 

d       d  o 

o 

o 

£ 

CI  i-H 

r-1  rH  i-i  r-l  CN 

rH   C]   rH 

CM 

CJ         CM  Ca 

rR 

o 

H 

H 

CM 

*»  N  *-<  iO  «-*  t«  e^ 

coca  c 

-rd 

li- 

00 OS 

CO  OCC  OS 

cr.       co 

~i> 

o      o  o 

S  O  t>  CN  ■— i  CO  rj 

*#  o  a- 

cr 

ce 

t-CC 

t-  CO  rH  CI 

00       oo 

>n 

t~         OS  rH 

rd 

V  CD  lO  UO  UO  CO  0" 

CO  CO  -^ 

CO  CM 

CO  *#  -^  ^  oc 

1   CM  00  -rji 

CO 

iri      in  co' 

< 

£ 

c- 

■et 

CO  -^  CC  t^  -f  OO  CI 

CI  CO 

HI 

o      o  o 

o 

t- 

00  CO  CM  iH  CM  b-  ^ 

*&  t- 

lO            rH   00 

y  o  o  o  o  o  c 

c 

CC 

XOOOOIOHCC 

00  i-H  OS 

rH 

O*         O  OS 

ea 

> 

ft. 

O  O  O  O  — <  r- 

ICOOO-f-f-f^ 

S7?i 

cs  os  cc.  ~.  ~.  cr 

CD  t^  t~  1-  00  00  00  0C 

t^ 

oo  oo  oo  x  x  r 

ooooooooooocoooc 

■ 

00 

HHr-  mi-^^^T-ii— 

c 

5  « 

CO 

H 

S5 

w 

H 

fe 

o 

o 
a 

0      R 

H        o 

f 

-J 

H          ~!       '  i-1  CI       '  ■> 

>i  b/j  be  bi)  M  b 

c«    "3  5  5  s  5  = 

a 

J 

co      a 

■a^ 

p 

c 

a  • 

CD 

J. 

CD 
CO 

a 

1    " 

ca      a 

D      5  3  g 
III 

) 

o 
n 

u 

CD 

CD     CD    S 

CO  CD  CD 

R  5  m 

.2  9  = 

+- 

c 
p 

I 

5   fl  » 

i.a  * 

"S  M  co 
.S  c3  f> 

a 
o 

o 

CD 

1 

rn          CD    CD    CD    CD    1*   G 

W             +j   +^   +-    +J   +J   4- 

o  o  o  cd  a  c 

SS< 

P 

CD                c8   2,FH          C. 

cSCCto^-fOc 

Sr3<t1 

o    .g  • 

rO            b^ 

tn  'w  'o  co  a)  r*^  ^~ 

73 

co  o'o'o'c 
O'JUOOC 

r- 

r* 

P 
1= 

cj 
D 

,  co  a  t>j 

;ja  R  bjo 

c 

I* 

r    1  "i 

cc    d3  : 

d 

th  cm  co  *h  its  cc 

f 

a 

riCMCO^lCSCOC-OC 

OS 

O          i- 1  (M 

& 

CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


123 


co-**  toc&t-oocsoHcico^iia 

,-,  _  h  h  h  rt  h  :j  w  :i  ci  ci  tj 


tH      nco      ■<* 


CO  t-  QO  ©  O  —  t 


a  b 


:tel 


CX< 


EH 


X  00    3 

'  «a  Sx'.r.~  = 
d  x  "  x  x  O 


^ 


10  « 


:  x  >_  -  ^  c 


S  S5  «=--<_ 
cs  =s"313 

c  ©  ?:  aj 

a  3  x  * 


If 

E  - 
o  2 

o  5 


£l 


<&< 


fcS 


■^2 

a  .* 


X  x 

no  J-  £  pq 


£^5"~*xx 


«  -^  tn  -*-;  —  £  3 


am  _  ax 

s=  :  a  =  =.= 

<D  "      .    B    "   <B 
1-9  •'t        US 


X  ^ 

S3  ^  71 


=   S- 

02  M  £  a 
c8  cs    •_; 


^  -7  a  —  a  2  fc,  t.    ■    >t,Ht]M 

=  J.'«H«fi;o      •      ■    c    3    u   3 


t^  «  i-i  a  •-<  co  x  co  ?  i  ^)  © 


C*»  00  —  **  - 


l^fWCOffit- 


CM  CQ  *i  C3         r-i  CM  <M  CI  r-*  CO 


co  co  X 

oicoi 


-XTJCtOO  N  -T  L-  ©  i-O  — f 

ci  ©  ci  r-i  o*  ci  ro  ci  ci  ci  r-5  *-* 


iC.  X  -*  l>  X  -f  CO  •— 


co  o  a  t»  n  m  w  o  tc  t*  ^ 

COi— IN<MHWNNWH?v| 


m  l-  o 

t-  ©'  CO 


-*  W  CO 

CJr-  a 

t-3  co  ci 

■"*  CO  CO. 


ih  r  i  x  ©  ?i  ci  — <  -?  so  3>  iq  co 

lOOOMOlOrt-^OlflHt-OO 

-+  ©  ©"  rH  no  t~  o"  c^  ira  ©  — i  x 


!  CO  CO  -*  CO  CO  CO 


i— i  O  CI  — '■—  ©-*©«-*  — 


■  x  -h  o  :i  it.  o  cm  x  o  r.  x 


~+©COCO©©'+©ClX© 
CI  N  CM  CM  i—i  CM  CM  CM  CI  CI  i— 


©©  DTflOCOHAOinCOOlQ 

X  CI  'tlflXW-tl'Ht-rit-t* 

>—"  co  t>  os  io  ci  ©  ^1  co  o  ©*  i-5 1*- 


N©  00 

©  t-  CO 

CO  ©  OJ 


C~  X  X 

ci  ci  ci 


•  ©  X  CO  x  ©  • 
'  t-"  x"  C 


'lO--+-*-*COCOCO-*CO 


©      oocoi>r-oococooc 


t-  X  CO  t^  CO  ©  C:  t-  CI  ©  L-  © 

CM*  Tf  *5*  CO  -<#  CO  ■**  CO  -1*  ■*$  'CO*  tjh 


©  ©  ©  ci  tr-  n  i~  ©  r--  co  ©  -*  oi 

rt  CI  ©-f^-CO©©CJ»CCICOt> 

BO  CO  CO  ©*  co*  m"  CM*  CM*  CM  Tj"  CO  CO  00* 


-f  ?  i  ©  x ■  ;o  t- — t-  ©  'O  r-  x  r: 

©ioxio©tr-CM©©©x-* 

CJ  T "  C]  C*  ci  i-"  CM  CM  1-"  C3  C*  Tj* 


©  ©  i-H  .-«- 


f-tco©       ciocoiiaoio 
do  r-i  ©  ci  oo  ©  -t  c-*  ©  oo  i>  ci  ci 


'-.ai.-.  \\ * 

t~  X   CO      ||    r-» 


r-t  ©  © 


©  LO  X  LO  -?■  C*  CO  ©  .O  ©  ©  i— I 
tr-  in  01  ~  -f  L-  ©  Ol  CO  ©  CI  © 

ci  ©  ©*  x"  i-*  ©*  id  txO*  ci  i-i  t>  CQ 


w  ©  ©  ©  ©  ?l  CI  ©  ©  ©  ^ 

©  ©  ©  X  X  ©  ©  X  ©  X  © 

xxxxxxxxxxx 


x   ci 

a    CO 

Q  B 


XX         X 


S  D       tc  -  9  0 
^   bC       «  P   -  bjj 


co  a  =  Z  3^3  c  :« 
rt"Cr3  co^d  cs  x  c;rOrw  oo 


If? 


>'3gS 


5  zi  f.       a 


f*3         H  o  n  n  -  ?K1  ?1  -f  X  O  3 

x      Ci  =:  ~.  ~  r;  *  —  — .  r.  x  x  x 
x      xxxxxxxxxxxoo 


:i=>      & 


iftCOt—  X©©-JClCO-1'iO 
HHrtHrtNClWNClN 


Ot~X030HC-1M-ri 


124 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


OCOOHN 


P.  A 

MM 

02  GO 

*  c3^ 
C«G0  O 

ad" 


T3gg 
©00 

2  a 


W  P>§ 

«53 


gt>  A 

a     erf     — 


P  p* 

HPg 


P<  Pi  Phi 

DO  S)   i1 
•5oo  +-  g 

S  ™*  S  o 

I  o  §^ 
goo  $  * 

5hftp5 
hj3  .* 

ti  ■  tS"3 

-r-      X  — I      p 

P   P   P  J3 

M  frcM  § 

p  p  p  Si 

cs  o  «  » 

.jh  -3  .-  5  o 
•fc  P-S'S'p. 

3    3 


-  to 

pt> 

M£ 

Pg 


IS 


■wt^lOQOH't 


■*  OS  00  CO  t-CQb-C 

in  oi      ei  r-i  c4  oicit 


co  t  o 

p-3  iTJ  CO* 


oo      m      oo  i* 
!M       OS       m  oc 


bJD®  § 


i  <m"  co  t>  co" 


CN  —5  ^ 


cdoi      m  ro 


i  m  m  h  m  t* 
;cs  Ht-'*  co 


>  co  m  cm  <m  oo 
co  in  m  m  "# 


co  m        o:  CO 

r-*  -^i     t>  © 


(M  t-h  m  co 

CO*  CO  C^  Tji 

-*  co  co  co 


e.  f:  cs 

COCICi 
iH  CO  © 


CO         CO  o 


5*  O  CO  CO  L—  tJ< 

w  in"  in  in  tji  co 


o  co  co  in 
co  c<i  ■«*  co 

t>  o*  oo  o 


t-  CO  1-H 

MHO 

co  -«*  ci 


■W  in  iH  <N  t-  i-H 

gCOOQOH 

Ci  CO  ■*#  <n"  CO  CO 


CO  ^  c* 
^i  -^  ca 


-*  co  m  os 
CQ  co  cac^i 


p-OiO 

<ri  Tji  co 


co  co       oo 
o  co      in  ci 


CO  l> 


OS  OS  CS  OS  OS 


©  N         •**  CO 

CS  OS  OS  CO 

CO  oo         CO  CO 


~  s 


j5  W 


I  g  & 

a.g  g 

a  M  o 


d  a 

6.1 


6       A      g  A 


H     <1H 


00  CJS  O  iH  <N 
rlrtMMM 


rH  tM  M  ~* 


tH  CI  CO  -*J* 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


125 


HINM^inOt-OOOJOHWCO^mtOt'OOOJOHN         CO~*m©t--aoOS©rH[MCO-*LO© 
r-|rHi-,i-)r-t.~('-(l_,'-<f_,WCNjCN|         WCMCMCMCMCMCMCOCOCOCOCOCOCO 


©    SO 

i  0-3 


.ft    CD 

f-  vi  fc-  'd 

oo  fH  en  S 

S-  >j^  cS    • 

..  cc  cm"  >-.  -• 

(-•aoo-aj; 
a  poo^lzi 

Eh  ca  &^  3 
rs  -W  S  f" 
3  £  J  £  -g 

4)    «        ^M 

|  <£  s  "§  J 

E'-So  a02 

f-1  ■  fcc  ft  CD 
—  N  C3  ©  © 
g    BO    CO    7! 

2 "3  -  >.% 

go  5=2  3 
02     fc     H 


•goooooooooooooooooooo-2^o--ooooooooocooo 

^rd'w'dT!,w'C'3'w'5'd'0't'C'd'C'w'3r3'd't!^,c;'^i3'^r^'^'^r-'^r^^r^^,^r-'^ 


in      c; 

20.58 
37.84 
29.64 

c 
o 

©©C-t^COCOCO©CM          OiniflCNIOHrtirjCMCSa          NHOffiOOHC£!^«OHlOaCNO 

-tHMCocooot'CM      -*oocoaiHp:i>ciofOiN      osioccocoroocMoc^most-t-os 

t—         CO         CO 

CO         CO         CO 

cs  ©  »  «  iri  o*  i>  (O  50  «  io  co  «d  ^  «0  od  c^  o  irf  t>  in      ^L^L^co"^cot>cot^c>:oco'Tj*rCurS 

i-h      <N      i-i 

r-t           lO           00 

i-i  CM  OS 

r-1  l<0  CO 

CO  00  O  CM 

•<tcomofioin 

tr-  CO  O  CO  CO  CO  CO 

o 

CO  CO  CO 

OS 
CO 

CO  CM  ^  1ft  CM       -CMi-iCO©       "^ 

t-H05003       i  CO  fji  H  CJ         © 

OS        O        IQ 

OS  Cn  rH     |] 
II 

CO  CD  OS  CO 
CN)  CM  (M  CO 

CO  H  00  CM  CO  CM  © 

CO  CO  CM  CO  CO  CO  CO 

<n 

CM  CO  CM 

CO 

t-*  I Ht-"t>       .i-^cdt-t^         g 

CM  CM  CM  CM  CM      ■  CO  Cfl  CM  iO        g 

!                     C 
o 
© 

CO         00         OJ 

T-t      co      o 

O  O  CO 

fficoo 

Trl  CO  OS  OS 

CO  OS  t-  OS 

co  m  CM        CM  OS  © 
CO  CO  CO          t-  CO  CD 

© 

i-H  ©  CO 

t>TiH 

CO 

CO  CO  CO  Tfl  ©       '  ©  CO  t-  CO         © 
OSlO  t-  CO  lO       '©©©CO         c3 

t-      m      co 

O  CO  OS  CO 

©  uO  ^  —1  ■■*  L-  © 
rH  <M  CM  CM  CM  i-l  rH 

OS 

•"#  OS  t- 
CM.  i-l  T-t 

© 

CM 

■*  m  ici  in  m    ■  co  ©  ©  m     -*^ 

CM  CM  CM  CM  CM      •  CM  CM  rH              ^ 

'                                 © 
© 

O         U0         CO 
W         CM         O 

ot-m 
r-*  co*  © 

CM  CO  CO 

a 

cc 

-hcckm^hmhoooooio^o      co  co  no  as  ©  .— i  ao      mos©osascs©©©oscscMmos©     **f 

COCOCOOSOSCMCMCDCOOSt-OSlO          OSOSt-^tOCOCO          CNOOCOHO«OOlOt>CMTfHI>»00         0 

CO         Ci         CO 
CO         CM         CO 

CO  CM  HO  CM*  i-h  CO*  t-"  CM*  CO  CM*  OS*  CO  "*  CO  CM  i-H  CO*  CO  "■#  O  CM          CD*  rH  ^  UO  t^  CO  CO*  CO  CM  OS*  CO*  CO  CM  CO*  CO         t?n 
^JCMC^CMCMr^C^CQCMCMT^CMiMCMCNCMCMCMCMCOCM         i-fCMWCMCMCMCMCMCOr-lr-i^-tCMC0i-t        2J" 

CM         CO         rH 
O         O         -* 

CO  t*  CM 

©  "*  OS 

"#  OS  CO 

cc 

OS  i-l  OS  CM  CO  CM  CO  CO  OS          CO  t-  O 
O  CO  CM  O  O  CM  W  LC  CO         CO  CM  CO 

lO 

CM  CO  CO 
OS  CO  CO 

■* 

ooooosmt-c-^m©©t-      s, 

CM  ©  L0  i-h  CO  "*  ©  t-  W  ©  iO        a 

t-     ■*     in 

cot^cococoot-iococoinioco 

CO 

co  ta  to 

lO 

COuSCOCOOOlOirslOCMCMCOCO 

<*        t-        TH 

•H         CM         O 

th  cm  tji    i           a 

OHCJ                      r> 

co  coco    || 

cococotooo-^mcooioioo 

UOi^iO^OSCMCOiOOOiO^CMOS 

CO 

© 

©  ©  CO 

m  t--  m 

CO 

co©-^os©©©©o©uoo 

©CMC0COC0lOir5tOCM©0QCM 

CO         CO         CO 

tDOWHHTtOlNOHHKli-l 

■H 

©  CM  OS 

T* 

©*  v-H*  ©  ©*  i-I  CO  -rj*  O*  ©"  CM  -H  ,-* 

v 

O  1Q  t-  t>  t>  t*  t-  OS  »0  O)  CQ  CO  -^  ^  00 1ft  CD  t-  CO  Q0  00  t-         t-t-COHHHHHCOOOCOaOCOCOOO 

inminininmmmcit>t>i>b-t>i>t-i>t-t>t>t-i>      t>  i>  t-  occococoocl—  c»  t- 1*- 1-  i>  t> 

OOOOOOOOOOCOOCCOCOCOaoCOCOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOCO  COQOXCOOOX-XXX'XXCOWOOOO 


111 


THCqC0-^iriCOt>00OJ©-HCMCO-*lACOt-COOS©rHCM 


i'*m©t--coos©T-icMco'^in©t* 


CMCMCM         CMCMC^CMCMCMeNCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCO 


126 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


OOOSOi-iC1«'tlO«Dt>OOC3CHiMeO** 


uo      co      h  x  c  o  h  ci 


a  £ 


is  sb    , 

■"""-"ts 

P.P-1 


**a 

■p 

cS  g  £> 

M 

.a®  pi 

c$ 

sil 

03 

o  3^. 

Ed 

.mi4  s 

03 

a  -^ 

§  8,3 

o 

+5W 


a00  § 

O  P  co 


■»-  O  CD  «  00  ^-  N  O  h*  O  CO  ifl  N  C  ©  O  QO  O      ' -  C I  *  I 
S^Ln*fOWriC0030)ifiH00m(DHCDifl     -*ooo 

O^^*^^^lOinc0^Tji0SC£JC0lOLCJC0C0"      COCilO 


;t>t*ot'h-oi>co©Hoorit'(> 

IHMOlHOCOC-CDOCDCOCXl- 


j  a;  uj  w  (j^  i"  tt 
3  CO  CM  CM  CM  <M  CO  CM 


CD  CM  **  X  t>  CO 
t^  CO  CO  L-*  tC  irf 


W  C)  CD  C.  CO  -+ 

r-l  i-H  CC  O  CO  Ci 


co  io  co  a  t--  m 

CO  :c  rC  CM  CO  CO 


CMOQ 

co'oiuo 


>  CM  ci  m  CO  i-h  CO  O  O  CD  CD  CI  CI  CO  O  ~&  CO 
:  CC  CC  CI  Ci  ^  00  -+  -*  Ci  Ci  t-  CD  Ci  CD  CO  CI 


ic4oQwdccoo6oJacd»fi^l**t-co 

NOIHWWHHHHHHHCXJNHN 


oc  no  c:  i— (  co  co 

-+  CO  CO  It-  CO  t> 
t^  t^  CO  L-^  CD  l> 


't-cocico-fcomc-Nt-coiaooncooi 

;  CO  C-J  lO  t>  CC  lO  O  r- lOOCiCO'^COCOCDiCCD 


CJ  lO  CO  LCO  -j5  CO:  ci  CD  iri  t-J  ro*  CO  o  co"  CO  CO  CO  L- 
.^CMCMCMCMCMCMC<lCNCMCMCMCOCMCMCMCNC>: 


;  o  o  -#  -^  CO 


o       co       ci  no  co  co  lo  r- 

CM  t-i  (M  CM  C]  C)  0  4  CI 


)CO^(NOOCDOini>C]OON-*COCO 
HCCCJirHOtMCMCOt-COCiCOOCilO 

jidt^ioLOincduot^iocoiJOiocdco" 


*r  lO  O  O  O 


OOOOOOOJWNtOOOO 
CJCO'*miOCDt>t>HCDCi&CO 


irfHHOHOSCOCC'C 


CO        CO        coco        CO  o  t-  I  CO  U5  CM 


^        ii^HOO^^  Nncd 


O  >-h  CI  O  00  CI  CO  CI      L0  O  "4* 

CO         CM         r-iCOOCDCOOO      UOiOCO 


HXOHOJOO       t-  "^  *-H 


A  * 


CC'OOCOOOCOCOOOOOCOCOCOCOCO- 

t-  c-  l-  i~~  t-  r-  i  -  t  -  x  x  x  x  x  ' 

X  X-  00  CO  OO  O0  CO  CO  CO  DC  X1  00  00  c 


O  O  r-  o  Ci  Ci 

Ci   C.   Ci   Ci  Ci  Ci 
■X   CC  OC  CO  CO  00 


as  a 


eg    a 


Sooooooooc«oS<eSo(e 
g-s-s^^^^-s-c^  P»a  S  P-g-a  Pi 


-S-2  S 

P   M   CD 


g  S  tt 
E.Sg 

a  K  <D 

33<1 


'-if- 

■  %%< 


!H   ImHcg  :s 


ooo50i-HcMco-*»ncDi>ooc;o^-*o3cro-* 


10      co      t-ooO)OHn 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


127 


;x^^  oifl-t  oHr^o       *f  -f  i>  t?  ::  :i  r:  i-  c  i*.  n  r.  x  ^  i*  ?i  :i  r;  •*  oo  ^  oi 


03  h  5  C.  N  O  W  O  r;  w  t»  i<  M         ed<C»C0^OCvIQ0Oic6CDCOrHlOCfltr-"' 


O^fO  CM         t>  "^ 

>  tjh  t^  cd  t-  ci  id  x  ci  co 


•■*  CM  ©  CC  OXJ)O^Cini> 

Olfttr-O(Mb-000i^*i 

©  't  n  ci  ic  o  to  a;  co 

<«#       b-  ■<*  »h  w  co  eo  t> 

CO       -<#  t-  ^  co  ci  ©  © 

OS 
CO 

CO 

CO 

©© 

©  CJ 

O  OS 

t+<  ci  co  x  x  -*r  ci  x  ©  —  ©  o 

©  H  i-  o  o  «  M  x  t- 
IHCJMM7JMHMH 

t^HCOCOHMTf  ION 

N 

s 

CO 
CM 

C]  © 

O  O 
03  •■* 

ttWOHNH-iOHi*^© 

'fHXO!Ot-l>f-f't^L- 

o  o to  Ci  -*  :i      coo 

OJ  (M  M  O  OS  ?1         -^  1ft 

©  CO  CO  CO          ©  CO -#  (M 
lO  rH  CO  U0i          CO  CO  .— 1  CM 

© 
-** 

CO 

m 

© 

CO 

CI  CM 

©  © 

-**  00 

HoxachaxcoiOrt 

CO-rPCO-^COCOOSt^"^ 

Tjit^©-*"#idcioic6 

*«* 

t- 

©  © 

O  O 
C-  CO 

HNHOoooooiflr-HHinHOoxo3t*oaooaa 

OS  ©  ~*  iC2  ©       co  uo  co  co  cc 

H©Tfl>H          i— ICNCOi-HC 

-f        ci  -*f  ©  lQ  o  ©  CI  C-  lO 

OS          r-*  ©  CN  t-  t-  !>•  ©  CO  CO 

-^  00     ' 

J 

CO<MHOOQ(NH(000.0^ 

— 

-t<  -#  r-~  ro  co  co  ci  n  c.  a 

^■^-^^-rr^-ji^ro^i 

■-" 

C 
-t 

X    L- 

©   CO 

^ 

^(NHCOOJ 

CM  CO 
t>  CO 


)  -*  ©  LO  ~+  CO  lO  rH  ■—   ©         O  CI  -^  CJ         ©  ©  CO  t--  CO  ©  CI  ©  CO  CI  lO  H 


CM  "*  t—  ©  LO  CO  -*  OS  fi 
COt^COt^t^OSt^t^t^L^t^I 


CO  -*  T— I  C 

■  CO  tr^  ©*  CO  ©"  l 


t—  t>  i— '  t^  >— i  t-j  c;  i.*:  x  ©  —  n  ©  ©  x  oi  ro  oi  ©  ©■  ©  ©  co  ©  ©  tp  ©  i 


■  CI  OS  o  © 


©CM©MO^i^Cl©^C3COCOrt'ClCOt>COi^l^-L^^in^COCOOO-^t-ClCMi-H 

I>c6aso©o5ooosc»oeo^o»c»i^odcocxji>t^osi^ 


'  CO  CI 

■  ©  ©" 


t-t^t-t>i>f-r—  t^t-r-i^r iNO"i>xcoi>^©c:t-c:ccixxc.  cct^r.  aoooooHr--^  h  hhh 


io  i-O  lo  l_o  i-  i-.  io  .o  i-  i-  lo  i".  t~  i-  t-  tr-  t—  t—  t-  t 


i^t-[>i>t>t-i>ccxcc  x  : 


X  X  X  X  XXX 


CO  CO  CO  CO  CO  CO  CO  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  CC  X  X  X  X  X  X  XX  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  CO  CO  CC  CO  c 


fan  So 

?*  s  « 


g    ^ 


Cj  P  O 


oooooooooooocoo 


ooooooooooooooco 


Q    H   ;  :  ;   ;   :   ;H   ;C  ;o  g  ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;  B §::::::::::;::::  : 

-   .......   ,  -   >:  oq h=H  C/2 ; ; 

*^cMcoM<tf30t>'00©©r^c3co^LO©t^co©©rHCi:o^o©r~co©©'^cMc^ 

Hr i  h  h  -i  h  h  h  n  h  :i  ckicj  :i  ;i  m  :i  cm  cJcocococococococococo^T^'^i-^-^fTf-^ 


128 


o 


THE    COTTON   PLANT. 


b-000>OHNCO-*iOCDt»COO>OHN«'*lO»NQOO)OH|Mm-*J<iOCOt-X010HWm"l<>ft(0 


C0OONOO00OO0000^i/:XN«D^fll0005OOO0000N0000 


g  r-jt-osmoiccco-^coioco-* 


■  win«Mccoocci 


lOOONiftmmHHHOi^noooj      t-  co  t—  <m  oa  co  co  e 


)OcoNioaoMiftOj^aot-ooco^a«OH(oco,*t»Nt-cocooo(0©iO'^ioooT(<cO'tmNCii 


■  C5  iO  CO 


'HOtO 

■  wcom 


•  CO  -«*100 
■  Oi"  CO  CO 


*b 


•"O00O         WCONOiOOiONiClfliflCDNOiftOOOOt *<-.£>  O  <M         CM  .-I  *■#  i-«         lO  -*  O  CO 

£  lO  «D  t>         riO«)Nt-HOO(Dt-HNO(Mffi^O)aJW'#HmQOOO'*         ooiiii         t>  "#  m  CO 

«iricaaw6d»flec>fci6NddpdMOMi>mt*cipcoH 


'OOOffl 


■  odojoc 


i  t^co  t>  CD  t> 


•  oo to  o  no 

.  lOCD  CO  IO  CO 

*  00  00  t—  OS  t— 


pes 


rtHHHOffiCiaOOOOOOOOHHHMHHHCinfltlflNHHtKlNgCjncOMn 

ooooooooi^i^L-t-ooc^ooooocooooooooooooaococcoooooooooooooooooooococcooaocococooo 
ooooooxoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooocoooooaooocoooooxooocoooocccocococccoco 

w  I:::::::;;::::::::::::::;:::;::;:!::;:!.' 
■<  ::::::::■  •:::•  '■:::■;:::::::::::::::::  :  : 
q      I::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::; 

■?  .  t  I:::::::::,:::::::  ■  . 
ssfl  g : : •  ■ 

|§|  i  i  !  !  i  S^f!  i  i  :  i  :  i  i  i  i  :  i  i  ■  :  :  i  ■  i  :  !  i  i  !         i        ■ 

ho^.  ::::::::::::::::::::.,:::..  .:.... 

0-i3  -P 

°a  §  ;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::  : 

c  e     p I    ........ 

3°  is :::: 

b      »  I:;:::::::::::::::::::::::             :     : 
-u      g  :..:.:::..::::.::::.::.:..::.  :  

o  ■    •    • ;   ;   «   ;   ; 

g      o  :  :  i  :  :  :  :  :  :  i  ::::::::::::::::  :  i  :  :  i  :  i  i  :  :  :  :  : 

O  §oooooooooocoooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 
8         d    .'•'■•    •',*    *    '•''    ' '    ■    •    ■    •    ■    ■    •    '•''!•    • 


t*C0CftOHMC0^iOt0l*00CfiOHW«^O«Dl^C0OOH(Nrt'*ifle0l>000SOTH0:lC0Tj(»ft«Cl 
^"^^lftlOlOi01C>ir3ir300lOCOO^<DO«CD»^<Dt»I>t-t>tr-t-»l>tr-t>'t>OOOOCOQOOOCOOO 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


129 


!>QO»OHNM-fL'5COt*aiC3C^W^*tincl 


oo  oo  x  os  os  a  os  i 


iCSOSOSCSOSOOOOCOOOOO- 


'COO)OHWM-lOOI>COr-  O  ^  C"l  CO  ■ 


1  eO  fc-  00  OS  O  |H  C 


too  ot^x^osesrocont- — t<  co  co  - 


<-noooooooooo 


O  c  "J  ©  yj  h  -j;  :i  -  o  'O  r:  ^  x  i-  cc  c^  c  m  h  co  t-  o  o  : 


oooooo      ooooooooooooo 

cm  coo  in  ci  i-h      cc  x  -j  t-  c  r-  r:  -t  lo  :i  c  ^  o 


i  r4  N  CZ>  t*  CI  M  CC  00  01  CO  -t  ~*  OS  t-  m  CM  - 


i  -c  o  ^  ^  ;i  m  l^  -r  c  ■ 


'C0C0)OCCCO(0CQHeOl 


OS  c»  co  *■#  oo  oj  oo  oo  in  c*i  co      h^oxi 
co  u-i  d  i>  r4  d  in  d  i-  -p  iri  in  x  co  in  c 


ooo   ooooooooo 


■-*   t-  OS  00  C-   rH  t-  on  ia  OO  CO  CO  ■ 

I  co  co  "*#  cd  co  eo  in  -#  *-"  co  in*  c-i  co  co  co  ci  ci  c 


tH  CD  iH  CO 

jin  CD  —I  rH  -*  ci  e 


O  C:  O  O  O  : 


OS  r-i  X  CO 

i  o  ©  os  ro  -i*  m"  c  " 


■»#  -*  •*  **  «#  -^  -*  - 


:3J 


^Tji^^^^Tti^-r^-rJ*'*-rti^-^^-Tji'rI«l_',Sin'^-^-^-^in 


8.35 
7.60 
0.63 
7.  05 
7.90 
6.85 
7.55 
0.95 
6.60 
0.10 

o 

00 
S3 

o 
so 

7.85 
6.65 
9.25 
7.85 
9.40 
8.35 
9.60 
6.  95 
6.25 
9.00 

o 

-  - 
od  cc 

a 

c 

c 

c 

- 
at 

'a 

r 
a 

- 
cc 

c 
a 

c? 

c 
cc 

s 

c 

C7 

C 

a 

cc 

a 

t> 

c 

o 

c 

CN 

o 

c 

IT 

— 

3 
OO 

so 

cecOOOnnCOCOeOOOOHHHfflMMNCqQOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHH^HHHH^'HHH 
CO  CC  CO  10  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  I  -  I  -  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X 
X  X  X  X  X   X  X   X   X   X  X  X  X  X   X   X    X   X   X   X    X   X  X   X   X   X    X  X  X   X   X    X    X   X    X    X    X   X    X    X    X    X    X    X    X   X   X   X   X   X   X  X 

ooooooooooooooooooocccoocooocoococoooooooodooooooodo 

-^t  —  ^  *C  —  ^  —  ^^'^-r-r'c-r  —  'C^tt  —  ~r  t  ^  —  -^  ^  —  'C'O'O'O'O'd'a  -r  ^r^rr  —  ^'r^'r-c'ccr^-;  —  .-  — 

r*-  oo  os  o  i-h  ci  *o  ~*  »n  co  t-  cc  cs  o  «h  ci  co  -f  w  *o  t—  oo  cs  o  --<  ci  co  -f  m  co  t-  x  o  o  ^h  ci  co  -*  in  co  t--  x  os  o  »h  C3  W'tmci^co 

XOOGGCSCSOSOsOiOSOSOSCSO".  O  O  OOOOO  O  50HH^HHHHHHHN««NN«01NWNC(:  EO»COC9COCOCQCa 

1993— No.  33^-9  ^ 


130 


THE   COTTON    PLANT. 


aoHM«<fic«o^cocioHCJM'tm'ot-a)oiOHHfo-i<in©^X'-;oHN«-fiift©i*QO 


»n  m  kn  m  m  ir.  it-  >t  it  o  ^  to  »  ©  co  < 


'00«0«DM-l" 


» o    ooooooooooooooooooo   00:000000000000  —  c=> 

>  oo  cs  m  i— i  -*  os  in  t>  ■•*  i— i  so  m  <?  j  co  c;  as  ci  as  m  co       HC«fl3inmmM-J«©inncoci*i"* 

I  *^S  in  in  cd  »n"  od  -^i  co"  co"  ca  -^  «d  ■*£  cc>  co"  i>  oo*  *&  *o  co  H*  coj  cq  oi  tfl  eo  c*s^  ^  ^  in  tn  co  ^  t£  cd  ^£  id  oo 


2>-  • 

*  a  » 

A   «8 


>oo      ooooooo 


o  cr-i  r> 


t-  CO  t>(M  C-  tJ*  CJ 


ooooooooo 


O  O  O  o  o  o       o  o 


1  C  p-i  ."O  X  00  t  f  CO  lC  CO  C5  t-  r-i         CM 


:  OS  L—  r-l 


woomtxi-  o  o  t>  co  t-  .n  co  m  t  im  cc  c;  Ln  co  co  -t  t- i  -*  i.t  n  co  -*  -*  in  -f  co  co  en  DO  co 


OOOOOOOO 


:  o  a  o  o  o  o  o 


XXX  X   X   x    X   X   X   X  X  X  x  ; 


t-mxcocot'^H      eocDcotNCD^fcomia 

^  t>  i>  w  i>  co  ©  co"  a  a*  d  co  o  d  c»  a  i>  co  x  ©  c  x  oo  w  od 


<  H  h  h  H  o  cKi  :i  ;i  ci  ci  :t  T)  :i  :i  :  i  :ki  *i  :i  :i  -:i  ?j  n  fi  cm  w  c 


X    X    X    X    X    X    X    X     /.    X     X    X    X    X    X    X   X    X    X     /    X    X    X    X    X 


X.   X    X    X   X    X    X   X   X    X   X    X    X    X    X    X    X    X    X   X    X   X    X    X    X.    J.     r,    X    X    X   X   X   X   X    X  X    X    X   X   X 


ooooooocco 


ooooooo 


o  o  c  o  o 


csop-oico-tinct-xoo 


'  in  C  N  X  C  C  H  71  77  -t  if!  C  N  CO  C!  O  H  ( 


-+-*-+  -f  -r  i  ::■  it  »*  it  it  m  it  it  it  it  cct  co  c o  co  it  co  -o  co  cch.t-i^r-t>is-  i—  t—  t- 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


131 


oj  o  ^  ?i  ??  ■*  to  *o  t-  t  ^  o  h  :i  ?:  -f  lo  o  ^  oo  c:  o  -  ?i  ::  *f  I*:  c  i-  x  ^  r  h  :i  -  -t  l^  ot-QOQOHdcoHiiaeixioOiC 

i>  co  x  m  x  x  r,  x  x  x  x  ~  o  z  r.  r  *  a  ^  ci  r.  c  o  o  c  ;■  o  o  c  o  c  —  h  h  h  h  p-  n  h  r-  h  ci  :i  :i  ;i  :i  :i  n  01  :i  ?i  .-o 

i-l  H  H  H  H  H  rt  H  H  n  M  H  H  H  H  H  H  H  r-  n  H  !M  ^  ^  W  CI  C4  :i  M  :i  M  :)  71  M  7)  -1  CI  71  CI  71  CI  71  71  71  71  CI  71  71  CM  71  71  71 


OS  rj*  -* 

in  to  co  -^  •■#  - 


O  O      oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 


coo   ooooooo   oooooooooo   ooooo   ooocoooooooo   o   o  o  o  o  o  o  o 

•«#  CD  CD  t~-  iTD  X  •— '  t>-  -f  "^  Ot-^fOH^ffl^C)  O  51  t  Oi  «         ITD  t—  L-  -rf  OS  00  •— !  O  CO  CJ  CJ  I—         C5  .— '  X  CO  i-h  ifD  lO  W 

-  iO  ^  O  "*  t^  CD  "# -»# 


ooooooooooooo      ooooooocroooo      o  o  —  o  o  ©ooooooooooooo      ooo 

0)03-t»t-00rrOt>717D00O  TjtOrJlfOiO-tr-dOinr- i  .— i  C-         CM  -*  CO  ~*  X  O  CO  CJ  W  O  t ?  -f  r-(  t^  CO  7:  m  CI         CD-J-^H 

co*t>cBaot>t>co^aiwciocoxoococ»t^ 


7171  CI  71  71  71  71  71  71  71  71  71  71  71  71  7  1  71  71  71  71  CI  71  71  71  CM  71  7  1  71  71  71  71  71  71  7  1  71  7  1  71  71  71  71  71  CD  71  71  7  1  71  7  17171  7'  71  CI 
X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  /.  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  x  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X 
00  CO  X  X  X    X   X  X  X  X    X   X    X   X   X   X   X   X  X   CO   X   X   X   X   X   X   X    X    X    X   X   X    X   X    X    X    X    X    X   X   X    X    X   X   X    X   X   X    X   X   X  X 


Oi  O  T-"  CI  CD  -P  ut  CO   t--  X..  CD  77  — *  71  00  -+  U0  CO  t^  X  O)  O  -— '  CM  CD  -*  HO  CO  h-  X  OS  O  r- 1  CI  CD  -*  LO  CO  t-  X  CD  O  —  71  CD  -*■  i.7  CO  r-  X  O  O 

-    _^7777C777C7--  —  •— ■  —  • — '  • —  ' —  * —  —  7i  ?i  ri  :i  ?i  :i  "i  :i  n  n  " 

1  71  CI  CI  CI  CI  71  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  71  CM  CI  CI  71  71  71  71  71  CI  CM  71  CM  <N  (M 


t-  x  x  x  x  x  x  x  x  x  x  as  a  a  ~,  cr.  - .  —  cr.  cr,  ~  o  c;  o  o  o  c;  —  —  o  c:  ^-  —  —  rn  — i  — 1  rH  ■—  ^  —  ci  71 


132 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


2  2  s 


H  Cl  ec  -f  ift  O  l'  00  Ci  O  H  CI  CC  *f  iO  O  [-  CO  fll  O  H  f  J  M 

:?■  co  m  co  cc  eo  m  ro  m  —  -*-+<  -*  -r  -*  -*-+-+  -f  m  in  in  in 
cjci(Nci:jci:icicicicicicicicicicicicimcmc>J(M 


■^OOOOOOOOifi-fCC'CC  'O  71  oo  oo        cocoinoo 


S  to  t-  to  cc  CO  co  c  cc  t*  cc  ci  m  h  m  H  I 


in  m  to  in  i 


>  tO  Oi  -f  CO  CO  ■-(  CO  M<  -^  CM  CO  m  CM  Ol  rH  ■*  t|I  » 


-f  m  co       ci  m 


NH  i-H  t 


■lOQ-fOOOt 


"  ci  in  co  o  co  ci  co  co  co 


CM  -—I  CM  CI  C  I  c'l  Ci 


C-1  CO  t-  o  to  o  to  O  -+  CI  00 

co  ci  t-  cm  to  Tf  cj  r-i  t>  co  in 
co"  to  -*  o*  in"  o*  m"  in  co  tjh  co 


-*~  O  O  O  O  -*  O  O  -f  CO  CO  CI  X'  OO CO  CM  CO  ••*  ! 

~COHrfHL^LOr-i-tH0C 


;.  m  ::  in  c  h  oo  c  co  ci  co  co  h  *»  c 

^^^•^f-tcOCO-^'t'^^Tjl-^' 


'C5OC0HC000-1'00: 

J  co  -j"  <m"  ci  -*  co  - 

'  "*#  ""+  ^  ^  *&  "i*  ' 


x  ci  to  to  to  CI 

t-  CM  rf<  in  to  CI 
l>  ■**  l>  t>  t>  00  I 


CO  in  CO  CO 


-  o  o  o  o  »n  co  co  i— i  ci  CO' t-  ci  ci  t-  o 

;  i>  co  m  Oi  -h  m  in  co  t--  '-  m  co  o;  t-  co 

i  co  co  i>  t>  ci  t>  oi  o*  ci  ci  oo  l^  oi  co  co 


in  ^h  in  ci  cm 

i-lt-00  tOH 

CO"  CO  O  C5  r-H 

t-I  N  C)  tH  CM 


r*  o  to       r^  co 


rH  CO' 
ci  cio 


ci  Ci 

to"  ^ 


HOG  -f<  Ci 


CO  o 

-*  ©  *«* 


C)  o 

■<*  -J"" 


iH  O  O 
~f  ©  l> 


C]  to  CO 

to"  in  co 


t-  coco 
ci  co*  o 


o      o  o 
co"       t^  -f  o 


CI  Ol  Ol  CM  CO  'O  OO  -f  -f  -f  ?0  -f  lO  C  I-  ^  CM  CO  -f  -+  in  to  CO 
■X  CO  CO  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  CO  X  CO 
CO  CO  CO  CO  CO  00  X1  OO  X  X  X  X  X  CO  X  X  X  CO  CO  00  CO  CO  CO 


0£ 


o  o  c  o  c 


<±>    •j.    i.    a-    J-    u^    ^r    —    —    =    —    ^.    =^ 
00  CD  CD  0?  CD   DC    k    tc  p;   a    CO  -„   CD 

ple'cc  -*£  §  H  ^  c  -  ci  2 
Sflfl§pSc»iflc3c;dfl 

^Ci     C=   ^     rt^^^r-J^JO     ™ 
^  lO  CI  n  1C  rl  i*   "'1     i  n  ri  ^  LO 

U  '=/.  u  tf   ci.  i/.  cX  cc  *    bf  c/.  c.f_  t(.i 
.  ci  ci  cz  r-.  :z  ~  cz  X   r  X  ci  x  <$ 

■    ©COCDCDCDCDCD'iScDCDcUCD 


£    —    ©  ft    CD    CD      ■ 

B-.S  p  3  f  «  s 
"3  w  co  2  ©  ©  * 


co  ©  a  P    ■ 

g  &  2 1  u 

c  s  g.g  g 
its  « 


h  o)  ro  -^  i-  to  r-  x  co  o  h  ci  co  -t  i-  c  t-  co  ci  o  h  ci  co 
■CO'  :o  co  'Co  co  ::  ::  r:  ::  t  -t  -T  -r  t  -r  t  -t"t  -f  in  in  m  uo 

(NfMCNiMff-KMCJCNC-JCI  CJ  CM  CM  CI  CM  CN  CM  CM  CM  CM  CM  •7-1  CM 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


133 


'JiflOb«OOOOHaM'tL'jat»000)OHN*-+L';--NXSO-HMr3^i.'),JNaiC50HKO^        ij 

h  h  11  h  n  h  h  h  h  h  ?j  ?i  71  :i  :i  ri  :i  :i  ;i  :i  :■:  ^  .~:  ^  r:  co  r:  r:  r.  r.  -^  -^  *t  t  ^      3 


-tcj-rf       ro  r-  :i  c  c.  c  o  t^  -^  l':  m  i-  c  -       co  oc  o  in  cc  —  m  t-  c  :i  x  -  *  n  ?i  x  r^  c  -t  ,& 

O  Ci  cq        H  CD  a  'J  Ol  C3  Cl  ^  3  L-  3)  o  c  m        -t  a  t*  x  :i  OJ  CM  x  .-o  O  O  n  L-  m  ^  -j  X  T  1-1  ■*-> 

©  t-'  o  x  :i  x  x  o  t*  i>  c  x  d  oi  t.o^  c  c  a  in  d  ^  d  ir:  ^  ='  r*  m  uo^i  w  -  :i  io  -t  l*  in  m"  2 

HHHi-tr-tHHHHrtS<lrlWHH«W«HHi-lWHHT-i«HHHHHHrlHHHHH  c- 


ci  ro  10      oo  ro 


i-li-H  WC3 


coo 
in  re 


Hifiu:      c^  ■-  i-  in  in  ci  ri  ci  r~  ?i  oc  o  >n  : 


lOcciOcococjcoxt-xr-LCX  ::cco>      oo  >— •  co  o  cc  co  co  r-i      5 


i-H  -*  co  l-  c-i  i—  co  '—  oc  co  co  co  c i  -*■  os  t>-  os  iH  »n  i#  co  -r  in  l—  cq  cc  c  ci  cc  —  E>  co   co  -+  o  m  x  w  co  : 
j  1-1  go  ©  r-i  ro  n  co  c-i  o*  o  i-j  c-i  ci  ci  .-H  ©  <c"  rH  t-h  ci  r-"i  ,-*  os  co*  id  — ' '  co  a"  c  i  co*  o  r-i  co'  -*  in  ci  co"  ira  co*  - 


(^^^^^^-rjl^^-JH-^'^^rf^^CO-^^-i'-rHCO-*' 


7.75 
7.61 
6.78 

5.02 
5.83 

7.77 
7.58 

3.58 

-*    '• 

O  CO      ■      -OlO      ■ 
L—  O      i      '  OC  Cs      . 

CO 

9.40 
10.21 
8.86 

8.61 
7.24 
8.27 
9.74 

^     .  co     ■  o  ci     . 

CC      .  C5      •  O  CO      . 
tJ     !  to'     .  CO  to     • 

ci 

I-  t—  t—  X  X  X  X  X  X.  OC  X  X  X  : 


X  X   X   X    X    X    X    X   X    X    X    X   X    f.    X  X    X    X    I. 


100  0C         00  X  XI  X  X-  X  X    X  X  X    X   X  X   X  X   X  X   X  X  X  X  X  X  X  Xj  x  x:  X  X  X  X   X  X  X  X  CO  X)  00  00  c 


•«      °   1-5  ° 


-a  a 

81 
™§ 

%,  ~* 
-  -►? 

.2  S 

X.  ® 

1-5 

,a  2 

a  § 
o  a 

o^qS'^o'Soooooooooboooo 


x  a.a-a.s.a 
O     Ah 

tH  CM  CO         i'BCDt*QOO)OHClcO'flOCDNCOOJOHCln^OOSXC:OWC]n^OCONCOO)OHC]n-* 

h  h  h  ^  h  ri  ^  th  .-  w  ci  :i  :i  ci  :i  :i  ci  :i  :ki  :•:  r:  c:  r;  c:  r:  co  «  m  n  'f  ^  ^-li  ^ 


§   - 


134 


THE    COTTON   PLANT. 


in  to  i^  do  O)  o  h  :i  r,  -f  m  c  r-  co  a  o  r-  n  ^j  -f  o  o  i*  x  ~  o  h  ci  n  -f  i?j  c  i 
■^  ^  ^  ■*  •*  m  to  m  m  o  <o  in  10  10  in  c  o  o  o  "5  o  c  o  to  o  l*  i-  h  i-  h  i-  l-  i 


■ooojo- inm 

•  t-  L-  CO  00  CO  GO  00 


»CD00OilO>OH,t>  PI  NIOM>C1'-0-HXX^  01  -f  t-  iO  H  Cs  — I  CO  t-  I-  CO  t-  01  Tl  01  W  N  -f  C  CO  1-f 

g«iom©«)NMBJN,*Nt>»oNO'«fiQOt-coiooHNi-riin3-tcxi-A.in'xooic:iC):] 

o  ril  io  ^  »o  co  co  6  i>  «  io  **  ci  i!*.  «  d  io  -*'  li  -t  i-i  m  'f  6  d  d  «i  '^'  in  c  o"  h*  «b  io  p:  d  6  ^  in  d  in 


(MOHXHrt         CO  CO  co  CO  r 


;  co  co  m  eo  co  ; 


IQOOIO  CO  pCOlAt-COHCOCQCQCACOi 


:  r-  x  i.o  -f  ~.  cs       h  -*  %  i*  -j  ^  o  x  -f  ^  :: 


x  q  ^  :j  x  '-o  i-  co  f  ^i  ci 


>  -*  iO  -r  -+  CM  PI  r- 1  tO  0  >  M  CO  -f  -f  CO  PI  CO  ' 


I  CO  -f  CO   C".  X  t-h  ' 


iT*-ji^-^coco-t<'*coco-#~?<'*co^- 


i  Q  w  i-t  c  c.  :i  o  c  o 


■l  CO'  -f  -f  CO  ■*# 


01  01  ti  01  oi  - 1  ?i  oi  n  :i:i:i  ro  co  co  co  co  co  ■  co  ro  ro  co  ro  co  co  ro  ro  ro  co  co  co  ro  ro  ro  ro  co  co  ro  co  ro 

X   X   X    X    X    X   X   X    X     /.    X    x    X    x   x    x     /_    X   x    x    X    X    X    X    X    X    X    X    X   X     /.    X    X    X)  CO  CO  CC  GO  CO  00 
CO  GO  X  X  X    X    X   X    X    X   X    X    X    X   X    X   X   X  X    X    X   X  X   X    X    X   X   X   X   X    X    X    X  X    X   X    XV     XX 

rd     ^  ::::::::::  I  I::::::::-':::::::::::::::::  : 

aj       c 

3    «::::;:::::::::;::!::::::::::;;::::::::: 

"5     o  :::::  ::::::::::::'.:::::::::;::::::::::  : 
.-      a 

I  §1  jii!iiiiii-{i!  jiiJiiJiiJiiiiiiijililMi 

<  +? • 

s  I N M  1 1 N  M I N M  M  M  M  •  N  \  M  M  N  M  Ml  Ms 

h    §;;;;;;::;:::::::;:;:;;;::::;;::;:::;:;: 
z    "w  .':::;:;!:;!!:!!;::!!:::!:!::  :;::::  i  '.'.'.  : 

c      o   I;;;;;::;:;;::;;::;;;;;;;;;;;:;;:::;;;   ; 

H         rj ■ ' 

§      ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooocoooooocooo 

03  ;  ;  :!!:  t  ;:;  i  ;::'.!!.'.';;.'.'.':.'.':.'  .'  ;  ;!.'■;.'.■  ;  ; 

a  ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::  : 

wcot»»csoHNW^LOo^coooHM«^LOO^coGOH:->rj-f»n»t'000}3HNn^ 

T|i^Tji-ttOOiOOLlL-JL':OL-A';CCOOOOCOOOt-t-t-l-[>t*t>l>M>XXXCCoQ 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


135 


iftOt^cOoSc^^ojco^ocD^x^cD^o^co-^; 


.'riNXDOHC]M-to'oi>ooooi-'C>^-*in'Ot^xr;o-'?ir:Tfoio 


ooooqoooqo".  sr.  r;  ~.  ir.  roc-3  ooooooooohhhhhhhhhhmnmmi 


i  71  IN  ?i  M  co  co  ro  ro  co  co 


d  o  c  o  c  o 


QOXOOOHt-.'XXLOONOO         O  O  O  t—  O  ■ 


:  -f  C  t^  C  2  T  O  ■ 


d  cd  x  x  d;  o  i  cd  i-  c-  x  co  cd  —  lo   lo  -r  cd  cd  x  -r  cd  x  x  c~.  x  c- — r  oc  —  o  — ;  co  -* 


OWOOOOOOOOiOOW 

'-'  r:  c.  X  r.  c  :i  —  co  co  co  ^ 


"*-^OOc:OTj«^COOr- '  Ol  -#  CD  ~*  C:  CD  < 


woooocoeowooi 


H  lO  ^-  CO  CO  O  -^  - 


21.  51 
22.13 
17.20 
23.89 

22.  89 
23.73 
22.12 

00  OS  CO 

i>  co  oS 

CO 

(M 

o 

21.50 
21.40 
21.  66 
15.78 
19.  04 
16.45 
21.  53 

o  ■ 
CI   ■ 

3.58 

3.20 

4.18 

2 

4.65 

4.83 

4.24 

00  00  o 
W  l>  l/C- 

CO  I>  CO 

•* 

<a 

5.60 
4.75 
5.74 
4.78 
4.13 
5.48 
4.85 

S  ; 

CD   X  CO  X  X  01  DO  O   Tl  01  Tl   ' 

O  00  rH  00  00  O         L-  iO  CD  -— >  CD  C 


CD  —  O  O  —  O   ~    —  -t  -+  ~f  X  C*l  O  t-  — '  iO  X  CD  O  O  01  01  CO  O  lO  — I         HACOOOOOQCO 


oiomto^i- 


i  "  t-  l^  CC   O   Q  O-  lC  l-   CO  CI  -f  tj«  I-  t 


OHHOOTHcoaxoifi 


OQHOOXXOf 


3  iO  co  oi  -r  m  cr.  oi  ■— i  co  -+  ■ 


)  -*  CO  CD  01  -— I  ~*  I 


>  CD  CO  CO  tO  CI  CO   t~-  01  0  1  0  1  CO  -^  O  -# 


7.41 

7.64 
6.94 
5.42 
6.99 
7.34 
7.50 

■*  ~  £r 

CM 

7.12 
6.90 

7.02 
7.10 
7 
(i.  55 

5.  87 
5.70 
5.74 

6.  90 

CD  CJ 

9.63 
9.63 

10 

8.61 
8.87 
8.87 
9.  00 

o  o  o 
in  m  t~ 

t-^  CO  •-* 

o 

11.24 
9.50 

9.  34 
,  8.10 
8.50 
18.  52 
8.80 
8.  20 
9.30 
9.49 

cococococococococococorococoo     i^-j-4---^H-'^-^--H^-----i-iHr-r-^^oo-;'-ti<r:-)"to'OL*.  l'j 

X    X    X    X    X   X    X   X   X    X   X   X    X    X   X       -X  X   X   X  X  X  X   X   X   X  X   X  X   X   X  X   X   X   X   X    X   X   X   X    X   X   X   X  X    X   X   X   X   X    X    X 
X  X   X  X   X   X   X   X   X    X    X   X   X    X   X       ■   X   X   X    X    X   X   X    X   X   X    X   X    X  X  X    X    X   X    v     X    X   X   X   X    X   X    X   X   X   X   X    X    X    X   X    X 


p 
o 

o 

c 

,3 

o 

o 

:  c~  z  c  o  o  = 


tffC  M  hS  (-I'd 


;<,■£<<<-. 


-  X  DC  CD  — '  01  CO  -t  i-O  CD  t--  X  CO  00  -^  01  :o  -+  Ifi  CD  t-  X  ~  00  ^H  oi  : 


OOQOCOQO  X  O.  O.  O.  *.  O.  C-  G  O-  O.  O.  O  O  O  OOOOOOOrtHrtHHi -h^h:i:i:] 


)  CD  t—  CO  D5   CD  -H  Tl  CO  -f  »-0 CD  t—  X   CS  O  — I  01 


136 


THE    COTTON   PLANT. 


t^COCiO 

IMCO'tlO 

to 

t-         00 

o> 

0 

CM 

CO  -* 

usco 

r» 

6 

corocO'HH'rrrr— r-—))-rH 

-X 

-*      -1*      -^ 

m  m 

US 

in  m      in  m      in 

fc 

, 

• 

"u'S 

'i  o>  '&    ■•so" 

rajj" 

"CICnT 

m  . 

ra       r^  co" 

<uo  a^S  *  SS 

"J & 

CbOO 

cup 

Oj           CJ  OO 

O  i— <    OJ  ~*    Oj  °° 

Cu  CO 

cv   1 

0)          Cv?2 

(M 

Ph.  ° 
a  a 
S3 

as    -fl-e 

£  g  3  go  c  # 

a*: 
gfik 

CCJ 

|» 

goo 

ctM    • 

a   .  g-g. 

UC    OH 

'8  a 

'C  5S  "B  »-•  'S  • 

u     ■ 

'S    Ph 

'g  •*  'X*  j 
B   -  S  a) 

-P 

ft 

a~- 

CO   03 

si 

2K 

1^ 

o 

£  * 

33      .    OC      .   05  -P 

x,  CO    ffj    CU 

li- 

»-S 

cr  ^ 

cv'-'  cu  a 

*2 

CO  SO  EC  S  OS  ■<- 

CO    „-  03    Ih 

3 

cu 
u 

eu 

>»<)  >■•«!,>•.!» 

Jk.^ 

m-2 

"a 

B  O 

ftg 

-1  &*5  E-^a 

a  5 
1'ti 

4« 

<j  g 

<1^<1c3 

e8 

CD 

-_ : 

fttyj 

&^ 

i  0  => 

co 

0 

£ 

1  is  12 1 gii 

C   3 

=  a 

1^ 

4 

-Ml 

t-< 

"3 

:o 

B 

^  a      a      a 

a 

1*!S 

art 

a 

a      a 

CD 

Ph 

5  us 

£.0 
a  h 

Bui 

a  3 

?.«  0   • 

M 

»JS   ft{?   P-P1  ^ 

.^  .7'^    rf.^  .of 

p  ft 

^* 

£  C" 

rSfi^ft 

3 

c8 

n^  go 

t3  of 

a? 

Tj  .of 

'a.ofTi  of 

+j  =c  aifi  as 

acg 

aca 

ac  fljg 

cc  s  cst: 

rt  £ 

ft«s  s  n  a  c  a 

C3  3 

ci2  w>3  w>3  ** 

X  2  W 

CO  43   T.  la 

•2oooooc_oc 

PlCC 
5  tC 

■*  0  sm 

n  0  S!C  s  BIO  a  it    . 

5 

a  5 

CO    ^ 

in  3  .S  S  .S  9 .2 

Cb    "    O    "    CD    " 

ft 

a. a 

dLs  a 

p.  :  g.2 

a  a  a  a  v 

CU  *M  CD        ^^ 

H 

h>     h>     hi 

^ 

i-s 

;Ha 

l-S        r. 

"*JcOt— t-©-f<~#C"l-ft^ 

o  o  cc 

rH 

us      t^      0 

t~  CO 

0 

-*  CS       -f  0       us 

jpirtin'+f^-ciajcc 

-h  cd  in 

1    © 

OS         O         CD 

n  in 

00 

in  cm      r-t  m      in 

cS 

v  io  cm  o'ioho'ho'cc 

co  o  -* 

1    °S 

PO         r-J         rH 

ci  ■* 

in 

^  iH         -1-  CM         CO 

,     *Hi— 1  r-t  i-t  »-*  r-i  rH  rH  »— | 

CM   rH 

rH 

"    '         '    '         ■"    ' 

rtrH 

1-1 

rtrH        Hrl        rH 

(5 

1 

a       .1= 

^ 

CC  rH  CO 

-. 

CM         CO         Ci 

CO  CM 

t- 

00  (M         CM  O         OS 

©       "S 

s 

CT 

-*  OS  o 

1-1       10       00 

l^  ^ 

0 

CO  00          CO  CO          rH 

ru 

-S1"^ 

c, 

OS*  -^  rH 

1        . 

d      co      ci 

CO  O) 

OS 

ItiH           1-H  -rji           US 

V 

CM 

CM  CM 

CM 

C)         Cl         M 

CM  CM 

1-1 

rH  CM         CM  Cl         CM 

3 

fe    a 

£ 

I 

CD 

1-i 

a 

CC  OC 

1  ^o 

00      00      10 

CO  -* 

CS 

CO  OS         OO         CO 

cc 

00  CC 

1   © 

rfi        00        CO 

CO  CM 

0 

rH  US         t~  CM         CO 

a 

CD 
rO 

« 

us 

CM  CC  if! 

1  CO 

co'       CO        -** 

■*  >* 

■* 

00  -t        CO  us        ** 

s 

I? 

T3 

rH 

-¥  OS 

IO 

CO         CO 

CO  0 

in 

O  rH         OS  O         O 

"3 

5         00  O  CO  O 

CC  CM  -ti  CO 

LC:   O 

-^ 

-*      to 

0  in 

c- 

CO  CO         CO  CM         OS 

CD 

o 

e>  ©  CO  »-h  CI  iO  -*  CD  "**  CM 

00^*  cc 

CO        ^        >o 

t-1  CO         CO*  CO         G> 

o 

,   -^^irj-^-^^^-rn-^i 

CO  io  rji 

-*-*-* 

-*  -* 

■^ 

•^  US         ^T  "^         -* 

,C| 

ft 

1? 

Hi 

Ph 

•*oifiiT-it— Tt<t-t~CiO«: 

CO  O  CD 

10      -*      0 

-p  0 

00  CO         CO  O         rH 

~rHoomccaocoos-*c 

m  -**  o 

oo 

OS          CO          CT. 

CO  LO 

CO 

CO  t-         US  CO          t- 

r3 

£)  CD  t-  id  t~  CD  L-  UO  t^  t> 

oo  o  t> 

1     lA 

c-^        t>        CO* 

t^  E> 

00 

co*  in      co'  06      eo 

^ 

£ 

*^comrHcCrHCMcocDc> 

cm  ©  t- 

1  ■* 

O       OS       c- 

r-O 

0 

CM  00         t-               CM 

CD 

~  r-l  ©  l>  CD  tH  H  00  -t  O* 

©  t»  OC 

(N 

t-H          CO          00 

000 

OS 

CO  t-         US               CO 

^cot^cioiosodooooQC 

©  WCC 

II  c~ 

00         00         00 

CO  oj 

CO 

t-'  us      1-^  os      06 

c2 

£ 

£ 

II 

- 

=i? . 

io  t-  cc  cc  oo  oo  oo  oo  t~- 

0      0       0 

Cl  CM         Cl  CO         CO 

oO'XCf.  at  at  at  oo  x   r 

CC         CO         00 

CO  CO 

CO 

CO  CO         00  00         00 

S  a'5 

oo  oo  co  oo  oo  at'  at  x  a 

00         00         CO 

00  CO 

CO 

CO  CO        00  CO        00 

£ 

5 

E 

; 

.     a 

c 

1    1 

<4- 

'd 

|    5 

a 

« 

m 

"3    "^ 

t 

n 

c 

§     a 

0 

■H 

CD 

c 

cc 

.2 

M         a 

W        O 

c 

c- 

p 

-        c3 

u 

«          HH 

© 

Q     3 

3  a  & 

~  a 

IB          S 

c 

'CO    p 

^    "S 

&f- 

'3  M  a 

-.    .3  ce  t. 

H         rr<, ~. 

H      oo_ooo_o_oo"9 

3S< 

I 

000 

0  0 

0 

OO         CO         0 

TH-rrJ,           rTjr-          r-J 

cd 

;  c 

o 

* 

(i 

£ 

6 

t-QOOlOHINCO'TfL'- 

to 

C-         00         OJ 

0  1-1 

CM 

co  -*      usco       r- 

ft 

COCOCC-*'*-*^-^^ 

■*      •*      -<* 

in  us 

m 

in  us      us  us      us 

rH 

rH         tH 

I- 

•" 

r- 

" 

r- 

r- 

rH 

r- 

CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


137 


uO.  ©         ©  ©  ©  tD  C  C  'O 


B  oo 

<pCO 


_  -*= 

Si! 

7"Jl 

ea  a 
flo 

.o 

^a 

i« 

O  o 


aSa 

a  ja 


g  m  o>  c  .5  JJ  o 


I'd 

■  <u 

•fr 

t- 

•  a 

ft 

•  - 

^ 

00 

ft 

- 

rrt 

« 

0 

CD 

«< 

s 

-n 

- 

f» 

0 

ft 

a 

o 

a 

£ 

p,  : 

asa    • 

« 

a 

CC 

0  c3 


ID  S 

g  c3 
<J03 


N  ft 
a  in" 


§  §00 

a      g-g 

cj       cS  — 
2    •  £-3 

8  a  Boa 


ft©  ftfc. 


3  P 

il 

ft"5 

o  C2 


a   .  o   •     a   . 

BHpH         ~p3 


nco  s^«  a: 
2  taw  mco|3  fci~ 
a  c  a  n -:  - a    - 


.NJte 


S  fi<     *S 


""•SHIS 

cc    .  m  -^ 
u  ■£  sj  a 

BftKS 
^    ^° 

2,Sa. 

cf.     a  fe 

c5  0(2 

a"  .  a"  ■ 

~a  ■*  t:  3 


■<is 


^  .X' 

aw 
cs  a 


5  P. 
a  zs 

-  a 


a  ^ 


feft 


a  a  a 
aM  a^jg 

R  5  s  .3  &J=< 

>"5        *"S  hi 


13 

h 

a 

ft 

U  00 

H 

T~t 

<l 

ft 

CD 

n 

a-jy 

a 
< 

B 

O 

ft 

a 

o 

r>  ' 

a 

h; 

ft 

a« 

ci 

a 

a: 

i  ft  a  oo"  a 

;     -  ce  oo  ca 

I  OO    s  00    i) 
I  00  -[1 1-1  -rt 

U  a  ft2 


©OO 
to   _-^> 

~-  3  ft 

."1  CD 


ea  ft  S  j 


isH~^ 


a1" 

«-; 

o  3 

'gpq 

a  a 

to  © 


><d2o 


lag 


^^ 


a     .a     °  a     ^  a     a  .a     a 


ara,y 


g  a  =  a 

1-3        1-5 


M  a  »  S  g  02 

a  a  a  A  a  a 


t- 

JO  w 

CM  CO 

»-i  CO 

CD  t-  OS  CO  •*# 

cot>  irs  co  tj* 

CM 

CO 

OS 

CO 

00  o 

oc  to 

00 

CO 

o 

00 

00 

00  t- 
04  Oi 

CO  CO 
CMt- 

CM 

o 

IM 

in 

OS 

CO  rH  X 

c-  o  o 

3 

CO  o 
rHi-i 

CO  i-i 

H  (M  CO  Ol  « 
rH  r-1  i-l  i-1  rH 

CM 

rH 

CM  TH 

to 

8 

o 

33 

co  oo 

T-f 

CM 

■-1 

H 

OO 

00  00  CO 

CO 

CO  i-H 
OS'* 

oo  -* 

ITJ  00 

OS  OS  CO  00  CM 
CO  CO  O  CD  t- 

"# 
^ 

o 

Oi 

CO 
Oi 

o 

OI 

CM 

00  t- 

to  t- 

Ci 
Oi 

t- 

CO 
OS 

CO 
CO 

co  co  vn 

CO  CO  CO 

C] 

i-l  CO 
<N  CM 

O  -f  H  X  iO 
(M  CM  CO  CO  CM 

CM 

to 

o 

CM 

OS 
CO 

o 

C-1 

2 

iH  t* 
CM  CM 

00  CO 
OJCM 

CD 
CM 

^ 

00 
CM 

CO 
(M 

HCOCN 

o 

(N  O 

CO  CO 

\a  <-h 
o  t~ 

t>         O00l> 
t— 1         CO  t>  t- 

CD 
OS 

C3 

00 

c- 

in 

o 

CO 

C-  00 

00  o 

co  in 

Ci 

o 

-r 

CO 
CM 

CO 

CO  OS  CM 
CM  ©  © 

-* 

ITJ  -^1 

oo  m 

CO  C-  CD  OS  CM 

irj 

^* 

^Jt 

Oi 

co  in 

o  co 

~ 

00 

CO 

rH  O  lO 

1-1 

(M 

HflJ 
CO  CO 

CO  lO 
o  t- 

r-tCO^f)  t> 

OS  lO  ITJ  CM 

CM 

i-i  m 
CO  c- 

00 
00 

Oi 

CM  CM 

i-l  i* 

C~  CM 

CO  CM 

Oi 

CO 

CD 

CM 

CO 

t-  rH  rH 
CM  00  CO 

CO 

O  CO 

(M  (M 

CO  OS  CO  CO  -* 
CO  CO  co  c-a  "# 

CO 

CO 

-^i  CO 

^< 

1* 

CO 

COO 

"I*  If 

CO  -># 

co 

■^1 

CO 

CO  ©  CM 
CM  O  -<* 

CO 

CO  t- 

O  H 

COO 

OS  CO  >*  O  CO 

t-  co  oo  ia,  ■«* 

irs 

to 

TJ1 

Tf 

CO 
Oi 

oi 

•*  o 

Ci  Oi 

00  o 
CC  CM 

00 

in 

CD 

CM 

00 

CO  ©  b- 

[-  CO  rH 

CO 

CO  tr- 

tr-  CD 

tr-  CO  CD  CO  CD 

CD 

o 

CO  c- 

00 

CO 

t- 

CO  c- 

CO  t^ 

CO 

CD 

t> 

m 

IO  CO  t> 

CO 

CS  iO 
<M  CO 

OS  CO 
00  i-l 

co  o  trj  os  os 

COriHOii: 

lO 

IS 

Oi  in 

in 

in 

Oi 

o 

00  CO 

co  in 
^*  in 

00 

00 
CO 

CO 

CO 

o® 

CO  CM  tr- 
Cr-iO  i— I 

t- 

t-  CO 

CD  OS 

00  t>  CO  t-l> 

^ 

o 

IT-  CO 

00 

t- 

00 

c-co 

CO  Ci 

CD 

CD 

CO 

00 

kO  00  QQ 

CO  CO  CO  CO 
CO  CO  CO  00 
CO  CO    00  CO 


co       ©  tr-       t-  oo       cc       cc 


CO  CC  CO 


)  CO  CC  CC  CO  CO 


—  a 


■a    rn'S^'a 


:^o 


.2  S  g 

1m< 


ua  co      ©  © 


©  ©  ©  ©  © 


I  rH  HHHHt 


O©        t-00 


138 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


CO  ^  lO  ©  r-  CO  O  Ci  H  (M 


CO  CO  CO  CO  CO  CO  X  O)  O  C-  O  CI    CS  Oi  CS  OS  OS  o  c 


mtOt^COOJOH         (M  CO  -i<  JO  to  t-  CO  Ol  O  t 


>  o  o  o  —  O  O  ' 


>  -*  10  co  r—  co  os  o 


CI  CI  CI  CJ  CI  CI  CI  CJ.  CI  CI  CI  C J  CI  C«  CI  CI  CI  CI  CM 


OOOOOOOO-SmOh 

5 


ggg,   IP, 

S^H  i-°ri 
(-  3  _  p,°°  « 

'SI'sS'pVS 

§.2w  a^ 2 

Jfc-  j  fi.ej09 

S  2  5 


ii  m  d  n  S  ■ 
oo^£cti,T3'-lc;00a;ooa)OCooa;oooooo 


DQ  Om  -S  O  ^ 


-  -t  io  cc.  <c  ti  i  -  :i  x  ^  co  o  co      HcoHmnON      o  oo  -t  ©  o  co  -i<  - 


>  ci  CO  IO  N  W  CO  -t  oi  o  h  CO  CI 


1  r-t  CO  CO  ~*  CD  CN    CO  CO  CD  CO  lO  CJ  (M  (M  CI  H  L-  CO  O  if)    rH  t> 

'  ci  o  ^  ci  cs  co*      i>  ac5  ci  ad  o>  w5  os*  <-"  os  r^  oi  oa  aS  os  ■<#  ■*#  ■*#  rA » 


>  os  io       as  o  co  cc  x  c  t  >#  o       i~  o  -f  a  ^  o  co       co  co  co  c 
;  o  ^       t>  «o  ci  yj  i- ao -t  o  r  ■ 


!  M  CO  H  -J<  ift  X  Cl  H  ■ 


>  io  co  cs  os  c  i  c  i  c  i  ci  as  co  * 

C l  !N  ri  H  M  (M  C^l  H  CN  ! 


CM  CJ  r-f  CI  CI  CI  C 


H  CO  L—  OS  — <  Xi  t-  tr-  -rp  i— |  1-. 

co  to  -r>  i^  m"  as"  co  os"  in  o*  -J*  -**  t>  cd  -*  m*  in  co  ci 

CM  CI  CI  CI  CI  C-l  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  C)  CI  CJ  .-h  CI  CO 


SlM'tOH^t^COiCacOt'OO 
W  id  O  CO  CO  CO*  CN  CM  CO  CO  CO*  CM  -* 


~    X    —    O  -h  OS  lO  r-i  -+  CO         CO 


!  CO  CO  CO  I*  -f  X  lO  3  I-  CO  cot-  CO  CO  -^  X  CD 
)  f  lO  CO  O  CD  CO  CJ  OS  CO  CM  O  ICO  t>  CO  CO  <0  CM 

■  CO*  CO"  --l"  CO*  OS  ^J"  lO  CO  -*t  O  CD  "*  CN  t-H  C  J  CO*  CO 


ILOCOr-HCOlOCDCOCDiOCD 


j  ci  in  i -  m  as  m  ©  ci  o 


i— i  t-h  re       o  o  ci  x  h  co  o  ci  **  cd  co  x  -t  co  co  in  rc  cs  ~r.  - 

coHin      hcoi>  occoi— i»ni— ic-iinmco-pinost—  '^ii-hosc 

cp  co  t>  cd  as  r- -i  tr—      cidc'd^Hriix^Din^ci^^ps^Nin 


-*  -tf  Tji  -tf  Tfl  CO  -HH 


t-^-^'^co^iO'^-^^t'^-rfTrTji-^'-^ 


■  i-i  t~-  C-l  LO  CI  CO  I O  C-l  i-l  CO  L-  CO  rH  CS  . 


!  CI  O  iO  ©  U0  ^  i 

i  t>  co"  in  in"  t-"  cd  i>  co  in"  t>"  cd"  in 


r-i  C-  CO  CD  CD  rH  t* 
CO  t>  in  CD  CD*  t>  CD 


)  O  CI  ci  cs  to  c 


■  o  co  ci  cd  in  c 

>  t>  E»  t>  l>  i>  CO*  t 


>  IO  *=*  t-  CS  (M  OS  CO  CO  CD  t- 
?in'cOOC0  1>"cDt>t'"t--"r-*j 


'  o  co  m  co  m  ci  c 


-  ci  c;  ci  '-?  Tf  cs  i 


>Cil>ioeoQOi>t>ooo-ooe 


t>CDCDI>l>HX         rHOXXXOL-XXXOSOSL-l>CDI>CDCin 


o 

^> 

01 

5 

Q 

o  so  r—  t~  t 

O0OOO0O0COa0CC>QO( 


t-  O  O  O  »H  O  00         O  O  O  O  (M  <M  CI  : 

ric>  Ci  ~.  C.  ~.-  00  CO 


^c;«^ccn«ixcoco 


:■  oo  oo  oo       oo  x  co  oo  x  x  oo 


•  -£  3 


03  C  -M 
CO  +3    ^H 

[^  o  o 
«  a  o 
c  w-  a) 


OOCCQOOOOC^O 

^  ::::;::  :  l^ 

.-3'tlC5CDt*«C10Hnnrli 

co  oo  co  co  oo  oc  oo  ~  —  c:  — .  ^ 


03    w    ^ 

CCOOiiOa       ooooooooooo 


OS  CS  CS  OS  OS  o  O 


j  -f  in  cd  t-  x  ; 
jcoooo; 


)  -*  to  CO  t-  CO  OS  o 


i  i— (  rH  i— I  i— I  CM  CI  CI  CI   CI  CI   CI  CI  CI   CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CJ  CM  CI 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON. 


139 


^ocac 

««-fLOCt-M-Cr- 

?]  — 

m  o  t-  oo  c 

ca 

-*  ifO        o  t— 

00  Cft  O  l- 

ci  oo  -*  in 

•- 

<NMN«NM«MnCJM?l«N»i 

r^NCJfMC^rdC^^KM^l^^ltM^^IC^C^^lrsICa         WM 

Cl  Cl  TO.  CM  CM  CM  CM  CM  Ol  CM  CM  CM  CM 

?    | 

;  o     :  ■ 

<e    ■ 

»    ' 

•  to       ■  g 

:  3      !  £ 

■£         •* 

(TO  o 

CO 

■  c 

x:    ' 

.  t-    '. 

exi 

'00       o>  S 

•  r-i           00     tj) 

"  o 

><  : 

=v  : 

_ 
i- 

-     — 

"     •  ~1 

■  ■» 

iflMF^ 

""• 

.  to  EC 

3  ■ 

2  :__ 

_H 1 

00  ^-1 

M  P 

!  a 

■  X  XC  r«  w 

d 

Xfl 

d  :j    d 

x   ^^7." 

1.8 

8 

i.  Bill.  16.. 
il.  87 

it.  1890,  p. 
it.  1893,  p. 

•o2  :"='-^ 

« 

-    •  oo  43  oc 

oa  _ 
x  p 

rH  -- 

'•a. 

:  o 

•XI 

Stat 
Stat 
Stat 
Stat 

7J 

ggSjp 

'  p3Dd 

1  d  d 

Sta. 

Sta 

Sta 

Sta 

^j 

cS  S     :  t.  r8 

RSv  -  — 

.    *3  -t_   -*J    ^_ 

jg     •  -  CO     .  ■ 

.  p  p 

ohusel 

act  cor 
chusel 
sota  S 

c3  ci  - 

7. 

> 

1 
X 

0 

'.  i 

CO 

"3 

.    pi.  i   -   £      ',   ?   ? 

~-  "t  -  J;  *    'So 

Carol 
Carol 

Carol 
Carol 

oo>c  :  :  :(it,=  s  :  :  2  :r  : 


ocsmm; 


a  o3 

£3 


iOC(SOOOOO<SOl!fe««*5  o"^  ohsl^  °fl^  °4J? 


sasa 


££  :*;£ 


CO  O 
CO  Cl 

-7-  t#  CO  OC  Cl  in  OS  -#  00  t-  CO  S  i-O 
CD  -r  C-  CO  71  Cl  re  Cl  t-H  o  CO  — '  N 

O  CO  OO  i— 1  t-  '00  «— 1  71  O'l—  DQ  OCOO'—  COOOHCOt-QOQOOQr- iW  i7.C  00  W  '*'-  X  d 

O  r-i 

oo  oo  ci  i-H  re  x"  oa  co  a:  — i  ©  c;  O 

o»  co  o  o  o  o  c 


■  co  re  re  -+  ci  cocooxt^-^-f^MOCioW'-iLirn-tx  c.rerer- 


l"qiOP-.ifiH03NHaOW 


« cc  r-i  x  «  n  w       I-.  t> 


^  a  it  o  m  -  a  -t  c  a:ici:i 


X  t—  «  c  I  re  : 


Jt^Cr-X- 


-;ct>'#  cai.-:  x  oo  r.  i  -t  o  a  a  r-  ( 


(M  n  ci  ci  ci  ci  ci  ci  ci  n  ci  —i  c;  ri  -i  ci  *i  ?i  ci  ?i  ci  r-i  ci  ci  ?i  —  re  ci  n  re  ci  ci  ci  ci  ci 


c  c  .r;  m  a  a  a  t-  x  -  c  ^  o 
cj  ei  ri  ci  7i  re  ci  ci  ri  re  cm  cc  co 


o  io      o  r;  a  w  c')  o  -t  in  a  -  x  x  :i  c  -  c^  ^  -  c.  o  «  :i  c  n  --  rt  m  t^  a  tn 

ccco      t^  x  in  t-i  't  -^  Tf  t-  o  -h  x  o  i-e  a  x  -*  o  ."0  r-i  s  in  t-  a  .-o  q  :j  ."C  ri  m  -^ 

cocacocdcoeoc^TjicoiAcomiooopio co o  o"  ^" m"  m'  c  a  i>  a  m'  io  lo  x  t^  i>  a  t^  o 


ci  o 
in  m* 


•  tr-       lOHKHHWrtNOt- 
id       xt^.-ocor-iciaojoco 

1 1>  t-  m'  tt  tjI  in  mi  t>  iri  l":  aJ  c 


a  n  o  o  o  x  r.  r.  c  x  i-  x  :i  x  h  t-  m  h  t — *■  ci  nr.  t-  ci  x  in  :i  :i  x  :i  c  cit — f 


xxxt^t-HMicMt lOm-rorecemci 

*  ci  o*  -r*  i>  a  e^  -t  oi  r:  -t  >f  -ji  -+'  ?i  in  d  -----  : 


l«HlOnOeOHOHW«l 

^  X   Ci  h'  r-i   C    H 


-X   Ot-tH-t- 


o  re 

CO  HH 


\n  c.  a  m  a  x  co 
i  i-4C4  c4  iMi-h  ci  a;"  l-  oa  i 


I  -*  CO  "#  ^J<  "*!  CO  * 


OS  00  O  O  O  O  ' 


■  t*  co  «  x  o  i.-  a  x  c  :i  r-  r-  a  x  ei  x  a:  7\  x  o  o  1-1 ; 


o  o  m>  a  [^  m  c  ci  co  x  w  co  q  co  ^  co  .-o  a  ci  a  -i<  in  x  co  lo  o  x  o  r]  o  r-i  c  c  a 
•  a-  a>  a  d  ai  aV  a>  a  a  io^  d  d  ^  ^  oV  i>  o\^  a  i>  t^  ue^n  a  ^  o  n  a  a  a 


o  in 


; i  iH  X  OS  Cl  CO  X'  Ifl  ■ 


xacriocomaxaa^a 
t>  ed  ao"  t^  t^  t>  t>  *o  co  cd  cd  o  co" 


ClOOOO  oaOlftn^MO 


;  i>  co  r-  x  c.  co  a  r-  a  a  m  :i  co  rt  [-  co       t-i  o 


in  Cl  t-  CO  OS  -f  CO  *-*  CO  r-H  CO  U0  CO  t-C-HX10WO>LOOOOO<OIOXHa 

co"in"ooo6xc^cdi^i>t>t>t^i>c^^cdc7Jooint^ 


o  co  ^  o  o  c  co  s  ::  r-tifl  n  «t 

■i"  O  O  CD  H  ?1  N  OS  C  t*  .-0  CJ  t- 

o6 oo od r^    "i>oit^cdi>odK>c> 


co  ce  cs  os  as  o.  ro  —  oa 


ci  ci  ci  ei  ci  ei  re  co  co       co  ~¥ 


cs  as  x  x  x  x  x  en  x     ■  x  x  x  os  os  os     ■     •  o:  os  oo  os  oo  o:  ~  os  oo  o.  oo  oo  oo  oo  oo  oo  os       qq       x     -co  o.  oo  o.  os  oo  oo  os  os  os  os 

X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X      •  X  X  X  X  X  X       •       -COXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX  XX  X  X  X  X  X   X   X  X  X  X  X  X 


i  .j  o  co  co  --  ci  cm  ci  en 
».  a  c  r.  a  c.  oo  os  o.  os  os 


oococccoooococoo 


rajr-r^r^^-.^-  —  —  rrj^FTj^rfjirj^ffjrrj  r—  rotr-oo  ea- 


ooooooooooooooooo 


;  nd  ro  ro  'd  'a;  rs  to  rz  ea  eo       -O' 


hw  co-tin  a  n  x  a  a  h  ci  co  -t  i 
wcicici  :i:ici:icicojco    - 


■xoiohn: 


■  x  o-  ao  —i  ci  co  -f  in 


tp  -f  ~r  -^  -f  -j*  -t-  -t  -*  -p  i.e  in  i".  >o  i.o  o       m  m 


X  OO  O  — '  71 


j  a  a  a  a  a  a  a  a  a  a  i- 


C*  CMCM  Cl  Cl  71  71  71  71  71  71  C4  Cl  71  Cl  Cl  71  71  71  71  71  Tl  71  71  71  71  71  71  Cl  Cl  71  71  Cl  Cl  Cl  Cl  Cl         Cl  Cl  Cl  Cl  Cl  Cl  Cl  Cl  Cl  Cl  Cl  Cl  Cl 


140 


THE    COTTON   PLANT. 


i  ©q  co •*& m s©  t-  ac  c»  ©  rH  ci  co  -*  m  co 


i—  r  -  i  —  t—  l—  i—  t 


I-  1^  OO  X   X   CO   X 


CI  C4  CI  CM  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI  CI 


CO  s 


c  o 


+-<  P^^^^r^^r-rT-  -  p-  g  ^  ^  -g.  „ 

or  ■  P  ■  •  •  -  •  i  s  r,  s  •  -hi* 


£Ph 


«  o  m  co  c  cc  r^  o  t — h  co  co  co  ci  co 


:oomHr- 


co  t>  CJ  l'  c;  t  H 

ffi  Oi  CO  r--'  CO  t»  rn  O)  d  CO  H  Cl 


i-i  CD  -* 
ci  o  co" 


■*o  -*  co  co  ci  co  o  o  i-i  i  -  co  f  -  o  o  : 


;  O  -~i  Oi  O  CO  II 

>  os  oi  t>  in  (O  i 


QClCOCM-^HCCHin 

CD  rH  id  id  id  -I-  --'  CI  ~+  CO 
CI  CI  CJ  CI  CJ  CI  C  I  CJ  C  1  c:  CI  CI  CJ  CI  CJ  C4 


i— i  to  co 
co  cd  ci 


^^CDCOOCDt-h^OOCJCOCO 

t>  id  -^  ci  CD  ■<#  id  ■**  CO  CD  t^  CO 


j  m  <—  as  co  c:  o  o  «x  <—  c-  o  — ■  i—  co  cc  < 


CO  CO,  CO  c 

s  ci  o*  co  co"  c 
co-rjicoTp-^'^'^'^'^'^-^-^ini'rrco'^ 


JtOOCOOiOCOlOCOQOt 
ioCDCDCiidcD^t^O"^fC.  lO 


>  CD  CD  CI  CD  O  lO  CO  rH  CD  CO  CO  - 


HO  t*  ~H 


■*-  CO 

m  -*  ~*  ci  co 

CM 

t-h  cd  m 

O  CO 

CO 

t- 

n  i>- 

L-  CD  CD  CD  CD  t- 

tr-  CD  t- 

CD 

fc-  t- 

co 

^^ 

OI>Ot^O 

^ 

CO  CO  CM  t- 

•—  CO  CO  lO  t- 

CO 

m  m  t—  -*# 

CO 

t*  *<# 

T-i 

or,  ci  71 
ci  »n  in 

m'  co  co 


-5  c8.S 


jjjCOOOOIOOO 
C  C.  CO  CO  CO  ~.   CO  X  CO   J.    X   ~-   x    x    x  cr. 


-*©  o  "*H 

x'  00  X  CO  X  X  X    X   X 


0J     • 

1o 

o 

- 

o 

n 

- 

o 

o 

n 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o  o 

rS^ 

*-« 

-:  nr 

r: 

T3^< 

0      S 


h  m  cc  -t  io  co  i>  CO'  *  ~  ■— '  ci  ro  -f  m  cd 


•  t-  t-  t-  t-  i 


X   X    X    X 


i  cj  ci  cm  ci  ci  CJ  CJ  cj  cj  ci  cj  a  ci  ca  ci 


ssh 


CHEMISTRY    OF    COTTON.  141 


BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

The  following  publications  have  been  consulted  in  the  preparation  of 
the  preceding  article: 

Journals  and  reports. 

Agl.  Sci.,  vols.  1-7,  1887-1893. 

Amer.  Chem.,  n.  ser.,  vols.  1-6,  1870-1876. 

Amer.  Chem.  Jour.,  vols.  1-13,  1880-1891. 

Amer.  Jour.  Pharm.,  1869-1871,  1877-1891. 

Auu.  Agron.,  P.  P.  Deherain3  vols.  1-18,  1875-1892. 

Aim.  Clieui.  uud  Pkarm.,  vols.  125-175,  1863-1875. 

Ann.  Chim.  etPhys.,  5th  ser.,  vols.  7-30,  1876-1883;  6th  ser.,  vols.  1-27,  1883-1892. 

Ann.  Landw.,  A.  von  Lengerke,  1843-1870. 

Auu.  Sci.  Agron.,  1884-1886,  1889-1892. 

Ann.  Soc.  Agr.  France,  1869-1870,  1872-1880. 

Ber.  deut.  chem.  Ges.,  1876-1892. 

Biedermann's  Central-Blatt,  vols.  1-24,  1872-1890. 

Boston  Jour.  Chem.,  1867-1877. 

Bui.  Soc.  Chim.  Paris,  1867-1892. 

Chem.  Ackersmann,  1861-1873. 

Chem.Gaz.,  1842-1844,  1852-1859. 

Chem.  News  (Amer.  ed.),  1867-1869. 

Chem.  News  (Eng.  ed.),  vols.  24-67,  1871-1893. 

Chem.  Ztg.,  1886. 

Compt.  Rend.,  vols.  60-104.  1865-1887. 

Consular  Reports,  1880-1893. 

Jahresber.  Agr.  Chem.,  1858-1891. 

Jahresher.  Fortschr.  Chem.,  1877-1887. 

Jour.  Agr.  Prat.,  1855, 1858-1860, 1870-1893. 

Jour.  Appl.  Chem.,  vols.  4-6, 1869-1871. 

Jour.  Landw.,  1853-1892. 

Jour.  Pharm.  et  Chim.,  4th  ser.,  vols.  5-30 ;  5th  ser.,  vols.  1-26. 

Jour.  Roy.  Agl.  Soc.  England,  1840-1888. 

Jour,  prakt.  Chem.,  1867-1869;  vols.  1-46, 1870-1892. 

Jour.  Agl.  Soc.  India,  1838-1850. 

Jour.  Soc.  Chem.  Ind.,  vols.  1-12, 1882-1893. 

Landw.  Jahrh.,  1874-1891. 

Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  vols.  1-42,  1859-1893. 

Liebig'sAuu.,  1832-1882. 

Proc.  Amer.  Chem.  Soc,  vols.  1,  2 ;  1878, 1879. 

Report  Cotton  Department  of  India,  1868-69* 

Rpts.  Ga.  Dept.  Agr.,  1873-1892. 

Rpts.  Ky.  Dept.  Agr. 

Rpts.  La.  Dept.  Agr. 

Rpts.  Va.  Dept.  Agr. 

Rpts.  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  1851-1861. 

Rpts.  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture,  1862-1892. 

Rural  Carolinian,  vols.  1-5,  1869-1874. 

Rural  Alabamian,  vols.  1  and  2,  1872  and  1873. 

Southern  Farm  and  Home,  1869-1873. 

Southern  Cultivator,  vols.  1-9,  26-37,  45,  48,  and  49. 

Southern  Planter  and  Farmer,  1868-1881  and  1883-1893. 

The  Analyst,  vols.  1-18,  1876-1893. 


142 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


The  Chemist,  vols.  1-5,  1854-1858. 

Trans.  Highland  Agrl.  Soc.  Scotland,  4th  ser.,  vols.  1-20. 

Ztschr.  analyt.  Cheni.,  1862-1883. 

Works. 

A  Practical  Treatise  on  Animal  and  Vegetable  Fats  and  Oils,  W.  T.  Brannt,  1888. 

Aschen-Analysen,  E.  Wolff,  1880. 

Cotton  Planter's  Manual,  J.  A.  Turner,  1857. 

Cotton  Culture,  J.  B.  Lyman,  18G8. 

Cotton  Culture  in  the  South,  Loring  and  Atkinson. 

Cotton  Cultivator,  Joseph  Gibhs,  1862. 

Cotton  Manufacture,  Andrew  Ure,  1861. 

Commercial  Organic  Analysis,  A.  H.  Allen,  1886. 

Die  Techuologio  der  Fette  und  Oele  der  PHanzen-  und  Thierreiche,  Carl  Schaedler, 

1883. 
How  Crops  Grow,  S.  W.  Johnson. 

Oils,  Fats,  Waxes,  and  their  Manufactured  Products,  Alder  Wright. 
Structure  of  the  Cotton  Fibre,  F.  H.  Bowman,  1881. 
Zusammensetzung  und  Verdaulicbkeit  der  Futtermittel,  T.  Dietrich  and  J.  Konig,  2 

vols.,  1891. 

Experiment  station  reports  and  bulletins. 
[Last  publication  examined.] 


< 


Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  64. 

Arizona  Sta.  Bui.  11. 

Arkansas  Sta.  Rpt.  1894  and  Bui.  32. 

California  Sta.  Bui.  106. 

Colorado  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  28. 

Connecticut  State  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui. 

119. 
Connecticut  Storrs  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui. 

13. 
Delaware  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  24. 
Florida  Sta.  Bui.  24. 
Georgia  Sta.  Rpt.  1894  and  Bui.  27. 
Idaho  Sta.  Rpt.  1894  and  Bui.  9. 
Illinois  Sta.  Rpt.  1894  and  Bui.  37. 
Indiana  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  53. 
Iowa  Sta.  Bui.  27. 
Kansas  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  47. 
Kentucky  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  53. 
Louisiana  Stas.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  32.     * 
Maine  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  15. 
Maryland  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  30. 
Massachusetts  State  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and 

Bui.  56. 
Massachusetts  Hatch  Sta.  Rpt.  1895  and 

Bui.  27. 
Michigan  Sta.  Bui.  117. 
Minnesota  Sta.  Bui.  37. 
Mississippi  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  31. 
Missouri  Sta.  Bui.  27. 


Montana  Sta.  Rpt.  1894  and  Bui.  1. 
Nebraska  Sta.  Rpt.  1894  and  Bui.  41. 
Nevada  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  21. 
New  Hampshire  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui. 

23. 
New  Jersey  Stas.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  98. 
New  Mexico  Sta.  Bui.  15. 
New  York  State  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui. 

81. 
New  York  Cornell  Sta.  Bui.  83. 
North  Carolina  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui. 

112. 
North  Dakota  Sta.  Bui.  15. 
Ohio  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  54. 
Oklahoma  Sta.  Bui.  16. 
Oregon  Sta.  Bui.  33. 

Pennsylvania  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  28. 
Rhode  Island  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  30. 
South  Carolina  Sta.  Rpt.  1894  and  Bui.  18. 
South  Dakota  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  40. 
Tennessee  Sta.  Rpt.  1894. 
Texas  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  32. 
Utah  Sta.  Bui.  37. 

Vermont  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  42. 
Virginia  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  35. 
Washington  Sta.  Bui.  8. 
West  Virginia  Sta.  Bui.  38. 
Wisconsin  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  42. 
Wyoming  Sta.  Rpt.  1893  and  Bui.  21. 


CLIMATOLOGY  AND  SOILS. 

By  Milton  Whitney, 

Chief  of  Division  of  Soils,  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture. 

INTRODUCTION. 

Cotton  production  in  the  United  States  is  limited  by  climatic  condi- 
tions to  that  portion  of  the  country  south  of  latitude  37°.  A  few  small 
areas  are  cultivated  north  of  this  on  account  of  local  peculiarities  of 
the  climate  or  market  conditions,  but  for  the  most  part  the  cultivation 
does  not  extend  north  of  the  northern  boundary  of  North  Carolina. 
Just  after  the  war,  when  cotton  was  bringing  a  high  price,  the  cultiva- 
tion was  extended  into  many  northern  localities,  where  the  plant 
matures  ouly  in  favorable  seasons,  but  the  cultivation  of  cotton  in  these 
northern  areas  has  now  been  generally  abandoned  for  more  certain  and, 
on  the  whole,  more  profitable  crops  for  those  localities. 

Prior  to  1860  cotton  was  cultivated  ou  nearly  every  plantation  in  the 
South,  but  it  was  principally  grown  upon  the  deep,  fertile  loam  soils, 
found  by  experience  to  be  best  adapted  to  it.  At  present,  however, 
cotton  is  produced  upon  nearly  all  varieties  of  soils  within  the  region 
in  which  the  climatic  conditions  are  favorable  to  its  growth,  and  arti- 
ficial fertilizers  are  depended  upon  to  increase  the  yield  or  hasten  the 
ripening  of  the  crop  on  soils  which  are  not  naturally  adapted  to  it. 

With  the  present  agricultural  depression,  affecting  the  cotton  planter 
as  it  does  the  producer  of  all  other  staple  agricultural  crops,  there  must 
be  a  contraction  of  the  acreage  if  for  no  other  reason  than  to  give  up 
the  cultivation  of  the  crop  on  soils  not  adapted  to  it  and  turn  them  to 
their  legitimate  use  in  the  production  of  other  crops  better  adapted 
to  them. 

clima.te. 

In  treating  of  the  climatic  conditions  favorable  to  the  production  of 
cotton  it  is  apparent  by  glancing  at  a  map  showing  the  cotton  acreage 
that  a  line  crosses  the  country  a  little  below  latitude  37°,  south  of 
which  the  climatic  conditions  are  generally  favorable  to  the  production 
of  cotton,  and  north  of  which  they  are  unfavorable  on  account  of  the 
short  season  and  the  relatively  low  mean  temperature. 

Broadly  speaking,1  the  mean  temperature  of  the  year  is  about  15° 
higher  in  South  Carolina,  Georgia,  Alabama,  and  Mississippi  than  in 
Massachusetts,  New  York,  and  Pennsylvania.     During  the  winter  the 

1  South  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  No.  1,  n.  ser. 

143 


144  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

mean  temperature  is  about  20°  warmer  at  the  South,  and  during  the 
summer  months  about  10°.  This  of  course  means  a  longer  and  a 
warmer  season.  The  daily  range  in  temperature  is  nearly  the  same  in 
both  sections,  but  is  slightly  less  in  the  South  during  the  summer,  giv- 
ing more  uniform  conditions  of  growth,  and  is  somewhat  greater  at  the 
South  during  October  and  November,  the  ripening  period  of  the  cotton 
crop,  which  is  an  important  faetor  in  cotton  production.  The  daily 
range  in  temperature  increases,  however,  in  both  sections  as  the  dis- 
tance from  the  coast  increases. 

The  mean  annual  rainfall  for  the  northern  section  of  the  United 
States  is  about  40  inches,  while  at  the  South  that  amount  is  exceeded 
by  some  10  or  17  inches.  The  rainfall  in  both  sections  generally 
increases  from  the  winter,  reaching  a  maximum  about  the  middle  of 
summer,  the  autumn  being  the  driest  period.  This  larger  rainfall  and 
higher  temperature  at  the  South  give  considerably  more  moisture  in 
the  air.  The  temperature  of  the  dew-point  at  the  South  is  10°  or 
12°  higher  than  in  the  Northern  States,  and  a  given  volume  of  air  con- 
tains nearly  twice  as  much  moisture.  But  as  the  amount  of  moisture 
which  the  air  is  capable  of  holding  increases  with  the  temperature, 
the  per  cent  of  the  saturating  quantity  or  the  relative  humidity  is 
about  the  same  at  the  South  as  in  the  Northern  States  mentioned. 
The  relative  humidity  varies  somewhat  throughout  the  year,  but  it  is 
slightly  greater  during  the  summer  at  the  South  than  at  the  North. 

The  following  are  the  essential  features  of  a  climate  adapted  to  the 
cultivation  of  cotton:  The  season  must  be  sufficiently  long  for  the  crop 
to  mature.  One  of  the  most  important  factors,  therefore,  is  the  prob- 
able date  of  the  last  killing  frost  in  the  spring  and  of  the  earliest  frost 
in  the  autumn,  for  cotton  has  a  very  long  growing  period.  Cotton 
picking  is  often  extended  far  into  the  winter,  but  the  first  killing  frost 
of  autumn  checks  the  active  growth  of  the  plant,  and  the  blossoms  or 
young  bolls  starting  at  this  time  will  not  develop  into  mature  fruit. 
The  crop  requires  six  or  seven  months  of  favorable  growing  weather 
for  its  development. 

The  next  most  important  consideration  is  the  amount  and  distribution 
of  the  heat  and  rainfall.  Cotton  is  a  plant  which  thrives  in  a  very  warm 
or  even  hot  atmosphere,  provided  the  atmosphere  is  moist  and  the 
transpiration  is  not  so  excessive  as  to  overtax  the  powers  of  the  plant. 
The  temperature  should  be  high  and  the  daily  range  uniform  during 
the  early  growing  period  of  the  plant.  The  mean  daily  temperature 
normally  increases  from  the  time  the  seed  is  put  in  until  about  the  first 
of  August,  after  which  it  as  rapidly  falls,  making  two  distinct  periods 
in  the  life  of  the  plant.  During  the  first  period  of  high  and  increasing 
temperature  the  plant  should  be  in  full  vegetative  growth.  Any  great 
and  sudden  range  in  temperature,  or  any  prolonged  cold  spell,  is  liable 
to  check  the  vegetative  growth  of  the  plant  and  tend  to  ripen  it,  which 
is  very  undesirable  during  this  stage  of  development.     By  the  first  or 


CLIMATOLOGY    AND    SOILS.  145 

middle  of  August  the  plant  sliould  have  attained  its  full  vegetative 
growth — that  is,  it  should  have  stored  up  all  of  the  food  material  it 
needs.  From  this  time  on  a  decreasing  temperature  and  a  greater 
range  of  temperature  between  day  and  night  are  favorable  to  the  pro- 
duction of  a  maximum  crop,  for  this  checks  the  vegetative  growth  and 
induces  the  plant  to  convert  the  food  material  it  has  accumulated  into 
fruit.     The  soil  also  should  be  drier  during  this  second  period. 

As  a  rule  the  rainfall  normally  increases  in  the  South  from  the  spring 
to  the  middle  of  summer,  when  it  decreases,  ancfthe  climate  during  the 
autumn  is  usually  remarkably  dry  and  bracing.  These  conditions  are 
favorable  to  cotton  production.  During  the  earlier  period  the  rain 
should  fall  in  frequent  showers  rather  than  in  heavy  storms,  and  the 
very  best  seasons  are  when  these  showers  occur  at  night,  giving  with  a 
large  and  well-distributed  rainfall  a  large  amount  of  sunshine. 

These  are  the  principal  climatic  conditions  favorable  to  cotton  pro- 
duction. They  are  gathered  more  from  the  experience  of  farmers  than 
from  the  meteorologist,  for  the  reason  that  the  relations  of  climate  to 
crop  production  are  so  involved  and  complex  that  it  is  impossible  at 
present  to  give  any  adequate  interpretation  to  the  meteorological  data 
and  to  show  their  full  bearing  upon  crop  production.1 

We  are  not  at  present  able  to  interpret  the  temperature  records 
and  determine  the  exact  character  of  a  season  from  them,  for  while 
the  monthly  temperature  may  on  the  whole  appear  to  have  been 
extremely  favorable,  yet  the  temperature  on  one  single  day  during 
the  month  or  during  one  hour  might  have  been  so  unfavorable  as  to 
have  affected  the  crop  to  such  an  extent  as  to  have  a  marked  effect 
upon  the  subsequent  yield,  no  matter  how  favorable  subsequent  con- 
ditions may  have  been.  Continuous  records  by  self-recording  instru- 
ments will  give  much  fuller  information  in  regard  to  climatic  condi- 
tions, but  it  will  be  long  before  we  are  able  to  give  a  satisfactory 
interpretation  to  these  records  as  they  affect  the  health,  vigor,  and 
production  of  a  given  crop. 

We  must  not  only  consider  the  mean  temperature  or  rainfall  for  the 
season  or  for  the  month,  but  the  mean  temperature  and  rainfall  of  each 
day  and  of  each  hour,  for  these  may  have  a  controlling  influence  upon 
crop  production.  This,  of  course,  makes  the  relations  exceedingly 
complex. 

The  following  summary  of  tables,  prepared  by  Prof.  P.  H.  Mell  and 
published  in  Bulletin  8  of  the  Weather  Bureau  of  this  Department, 
gives  the  principal  features  of  the  climatic  conditions  of  different  sec- 
tions of  the  cotton  belt  during  the  growing  season  of  the  crop. 

Table  1  gives  the  earliest  and  latest  dates  of  the  last  killing  frosts  in 
the  spring  from  1871  to  1891,  both  inclusive,  and  gives  the  average  date 

'When  the  conditions  are  such  that  there  is  a  tendency  to  excessive  growth  of 
"weed"  a  dry  hot  May  and  June  to  check  overgrowth  of  the  plant  may  be  found 
beneficial. 

1993— No.  33 10 


146 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


at  which  they  have  occurred.  The  heavy  frosts  at  the  South  have 
generally  ended  by  the  15th  of  April,  and  it  is  customary  to  plant  cot- 
ton from  April  1  to  May  10,  as  there  is  then  little  chance  of  the  crop 
being  injured  by  the  time  it  has  germinated  and  appeared  above  the 
surface.  It  is  not  considered  advisable,  however,  to  begin  planting 
before  April  15  on  account  of  the  cool  nights  during  this  month,  which 
are  liable  to  reduce  the  vitality  of  the  plants. 

Tahle  1. — Dates  of  last  IciUing  frosts  in  the  cotton  belt,  exhibiting  early  and  backward 
springs,  from  1871  to  1891,  inclusive. 


Station. 


ALONQ   THE   NORTHERN    LIMIT. 


Atlanta,  Ga 

Charlotte,  N.  C 

Chattanooga,  Tenn . 

El  Paso,  Tex 

Fort  Davis,  Tex 

Fort  Elliott,  Tex... 
Fort  Smith,  Ark  . . . 
Knoxville,  Tenn.... 
Little  Pock,  Ark . . . 

Memphis,  Tenn 

Nashville,  Tenn 


THROIGH   THE   MIDDLE    PORTION. 


Auburn,  Ala . 
Augusta,  Ga . 


Earliest. 


Feb. 
Mar. 
Jan. 
Mar. 
Feb. 
Mar. 
Mar. 
Mar. 
Feb. 
Feb. 
Feb. 


2, 1882 
10, 1884 
25, 1880 

7,  1885 

25. 1888 
2, 1800 
9, 1884 

17, 1800 
22, 1882 

25. 1889 
2, 1882 


Mar.  11, : 
Feb.  " 


,1889 
,1882 

Charleston,^  S.  C i  Jan.     4,1882 

,  1882 
,1878 

1882 
,1889 

1887 
,1874 


Hatteras,  N.  C. 
Kitty  Hawk,  N.  C. 
Montgomery,  Ala . 

Palestine,  Tex 

Shreveport,  La 

Vicksburg,  Miss  . . 
Wilmington,  N,  C . 


ALONG  THE  SOUTHERN  LIMIT. 


Jan.  4, : 
Jan.  18,: 
Feb.  2,: 
Feb.  24, : 
Jan.  12, 
Jan.  16,: 
Jan.  23, : 


Brownsville,  Tex Dec. 

Cedar  Keys,  Fla Dec. 

Galveston,  Tex !  Dec. 

Indianola,  Tex Nov. 

Jacksonville,  Fla Dec 


Mobile,  Ala . 

New  Orleans,  La 

Pensacola,  Fla 

Rio  Grande  City,  Tex . 

San  Antonio,  Tex 

Savannah,  Ga 


Dec. 
Nov. 
Dec. 
Dec. 
Dec. 
Jan. 


26, 1880 
7, 1887 
26, 1880 
30,  1878 
18, 1880 
27, 1880 
26, 1882 
27, 1880 
16, 1882 
7, 1878 
4, 1884 


Latest. 

Apr. 

8,1880 

May 

3,1879 

Apr. 

8, 1886 

Apr. 

2'J,  1882 

Apr. 

22,  1884 

Apr. 

30, 1880 

Apr. 

5, 1887 

Apr. 

25,  1883 

Apr. 

14,  1881 

Apr. 

16, 1882 

May 

1, 1886 

Apr. 

6, 1886 

Apr. 

14, 1885 

'Apr. 

2, 1881 

Apr. 

5,  1881 

Apr. 

19, 1875 

Apr. 

6, 1886 

Apr. 

7, 1886 

Apr. 

7, 1886 

Apr. 

6, 1886 

Apr. 

20, 1890 

Mar. 

1, 1890 

Mar. 

12, 1888 

Mar. 

1, 1890 

Apr. 

14,  1881 

Mar. 

23, 1883 

Apr. 

6, 1886 

Mar. 

14, 1886 

-Mar. 

23, 1881 

Mar. 

2,  1890 

Apr. 

14, 1881 

Apr. 

13, 1885 

Average. 


Mar.  17 
Mar.  30 
Mar.  18 
Mar.  31 
Apr.  1 
Apr.  6 
Mar.  22 
Apr.  7 
Mar.  21 
Mar.  31 
Mar.  28 


Mar.  23 
Mar.  18 
Feb.  25 
Feb.  23 
Mar.  12 
Mar.  8 
Mar.  17 
Feb.  24 
Feb.  27 
Mar.  14 


Jan.  29 
Jan.  22 
Jan.  27 
Feb.  7 
Feb.  3 
Feb.  21 
Jan.  13 
Feb.  24 
Jan.  24 
Feb.  11 
Feb.  26 


1Alsoinl887. 


*Also  in  1885. 


Table  2  gives  the  date  of  the  first  killing  frost  of  the  autumn  in  the 
cotton  belt  from  1832  to  1890,  inclusive.  The  detailed  information  for 
the  separate  localities  is  not  published  in  the  bulletin  from  which 
the  table  is  taken.  It  is  stated  in  a  general  wa^that  at  Charlotte, 
Chattanooga,  and  Nashville  frosts  may  be  expected  as  early  as  October 
15;  at  Atlanta,  Starksville,  Vicksburg,  and  Palestine  killing  frosts 
usually  occur  as  early  as  November  1,  while  along  the  coast  of  Georgia 
and  Alabama  they  may  be  expected  any  time  after  November  15. 


CLIMATOLOGY    AND    SOILS. 
Table  2. — Dates  of  the  first  killing  frosts  in  the  cotton  belt. 


147 


Year. 

Oct. 

Nov. 

Dec. 

Year. 

Oct, 

Nov. 

Dec. 

1832 

20 
21 

20 

1864 

1833       

1865 

20 

1834  

1866 

1835        

12 

1867 

26 

24 
21 
18 

29 
15 
7 

1836         

1S08 

1837           

26 

1869 

1838            

1870 

1839    

1871 

1840    

14 

1872 " 

1841         

25 
25 

1873 

1S12  



1874 1 

7 

1843 

1875 1 

1 

1844 

14 



1876 

26 
19 
20 
21 
13 
23 
20 

1845 

12 
19 

1877 

1840     

30 

1878 1 

1847 

1  . 

1879 1 

1848 

26 
17 
6 

27 

1880  1 

1849     

1881 

1850 

1882 

1851 

1883 

12 

1852    

1884 

24 

1 

13 

16 

18 
20 
17 

1853 

14 

1885 

1854 

1886 

1855       

25 

8 

1887 

1850 

1888 

1857 

1889 



1858     

7 

1890 

1859 

1891 

7 

25 
15 

9 

I860.        

13 

1892 

1861 ...     

24 

1893 

1862        

1894 

1863  

24 

These  tables  show  the  length  of  the  season  in  the  different  sections 
of  the  cotton  belt. 

The  winters  in  the  cotton  belt  are  seldom  severe  and  the  temperature 
rarely  reaches  zero  except  in  the  northern  portion,  where  the  climatic 
conditions  are  liable  to  extreme  or  sudden  changes.  The  conditions 
are  generally  unfavorable  to  cotton  production  where  the  winter  and 
spring  temperatures  are  very  low,  as  the  growing  season  is  liable  to  be 
too  short  for  the  maturity  of  the  crop. 

Table  3  shows  the  minimum  temperature  of  the  three  winter  months 
in  a  number  of  localities  in  different  sections  of  the  cotton  belt. 

Table  3. —  Winter  minimum  temperature  at  stations  of  the  cotton  belt  of  the  Southern 

States. 


Station. 


NOKTHEItN  PORTION. 

Atlanta,  Ga 

Charlotte,  N.  C 

Chattanooga,  Tenn 

El  Paso,  Tex 

Fort  Davis,  Tex 

Fort  Elliott,  Tex 

Fort  Smith,  Ark 

Knox ville,  Tenn 

Little  Rock.  Ark 

Memphis,  Tenn 

Nashville,  Tenn 


Length 

of 
record. 


Tears. 
13 
13 
13 
14 
11 
10 
10 
21 
13 
20 
21 


Mini- 
mum. 


°F. 
2 
5 
7 
5 
3 

14 
7 

16 
5 
8 

10 


Month  and 
year. 


Jan.,  1886 
Dec,  1880 
Jan.,  1886 
Dec,  1880 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1888 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1884 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1884 


Mean  minimum. 


Dec 


°F. 
■67.6 
35.5 
35.6 
32.9 
33.2 
25.6 
33.8 
32.3 
38.5 
38.1 
33.9 


Jan. 


°F. 
35.4 
33.8 
34 
30.7 
30.1 
18.7 
26.8 
30.6 
33.7 
32.8 
30.5 


Feb. 


Number 
of  times 
minimum 
was  zero 

and 
below. 


°F. 
39.7 
37.4 
37.7 
35.8 
34.8 
24.2 
32.3 
34.2 
38 

37.7 
34.1 


148  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Table  3. —  Winter  minimum  temperature  at  stations  of  the  cotton  belt,  etc. — Continued. 


Station. 


MIDDLE  PORTION. 

Auburn,  Ala 

Augusta,  Ga 

Charleston,  S.  (J 

Green  Springs,  Ala 

Hatteras,  N."C 

Kitty  Hawk,  N.  C 

Montgomery,  Ala 

Palestine,  Tex 

Shreveport,  La 

Union  Springs,  Ala 

Vicksburg,  Miss 

Wilmington,  N.  C 

SOUTHERN  PORTION. 

Brownsville,  Tex 

Cedar  Keys,  Fla 

Galveston,  Tex 

Indianola,  Tex 

Jacksonville,  Fla 

Mobile,  Ala 

New  Orleans,  La 

Pensacola,  Fla 

Kio  Grande  City,  Tex 

San  Antonio,  Tex 

Savannah,  Ga 


Length 

Mini- 

record. 

mum. 

Tears. 

o  _p. 

14 

3 

20 

G 

20 

10 

27 

2 

17 

8 

17 

5 

19 

5 

10 

0 

20 

1 

24 

8 

20 

3 

21 

0 

16 

18 

10 

15.5 

21 

11 

14 

12 

20 

15 

21 

11 

21 

15 

12 

15 

15 

19 

15 

6 

21 

12 

Mean  minimum. 


Montli  and 

year. 


Dec. 


«Tan.,  1884 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1886 
Dec.,  1880 
Feb.,  1886 
Jan.,  1S86 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1884 


)I)ec,  1880,- 
^Jan.,  18815 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1880 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1881 
Jan.,  1886 
Jan.,  1886 


39.  7 

30 

44.8 


42 

40.1 

40.0 

42.6 

41.6 


42.7 
39.9 


51.4 
51.5 
50.1 


Jan.        Feb 


°  F. 
38.2 
38.8 
44.5 


39.3 
36.  6 
40.1 
38.3 


39.  9 
38.9 


50 

51 

47.4 

43.8 

47.5 

43.6 

47.3 

46.3 

47.7 

41 

43.7 


o  js\ 
44.8 
42 
46.2 


41.  9 
39.4 
44.4 
43.8 
43.1 


44.2 
41.5 


55.2 

54.9 

52.9 

49.9 

50.8 

47.6 

51.2 

51 

54.2 

46.8 

46.9 


Table  4  gives  the  mean  monthly  temperature  of  stations  in  the  dif- 
ferent sections  of  the  cotton  belt  during  the  growing  season,  Table 
5  gives  the  mean  minimum  temperature,  and  Table  C  gives  the  mean 
maximum  temperature  of  the  same  place. 

Table  4. — Mean  monthly  temperature  of  stations  in  the  cotton  belt. 


Station. 


NORTHERN  SECTION. 

Atlanta,  Ga 

Charlotte,  N.  C 

Chattanooga,  Tenn 

El  Paso,  Tex 

Fort  Davis,  Tex 

Fort  Elliott,  Tex 

Fort  Smith,  Ark 

Knoxville,  Tenn 

Little  Pock,  Ark 

Memphis,  Tenn 

Nashville,  Tenn 

Mean 

MIDDLE  SECTION. 

Auburn,  Ala 

Augusta,  Ga 

Charleston,  S.  C 

Hatteras,  N.  C 

Kitty  Hawk,  N.  C 

Montgomery,  Ala 

Palestine,  Tex 

Shreveport,  La 

Vicksburg,  Miss 

Wilmington,  N.  C 

Mean 


Apr. 


oF_ 
61.6 
59.9 
62.7 
64.3 
60.7 
57.1 
62.8 
58 

63.5 
62.5 
59.6 


61 


63.4 

64.6 

64.4 

56.9 

56 

65.8 

66.7 

67.3 

65.9 

60.5 

63.2 


68.9 
68.8 
68.9 
73.1 
68.4 
69.7 
68.9 
66.  7 
70.2 
70.3 
67.9 


9.2 


71.4 

72.5 

72.3 

67.2 

65.9 

73.4 

71.6 

74 

72.9 

67.2 


70.8 


June. 


°F. 
75.  7 
75.9 
75.7 
81.5 
78.3 
73.7 
77.2 
74.2 
77.8 
78 
75.9 


76.7 


76.7 

79.2 

79.4 

74 

74.2 

80.4 

79 

81 

79.5 

76.2 


July. 


°F. 
78!  3 
78.6 
78.5 
83.4 
76.8 
78.1 
81.5 
77.4 
81.1 
81.4 
79.6 


79.5 


78 

82.2 

82 

77.6 

78.3 

82,6 

82.3 

83.8 

82.4 

79.5 


80.9 


Aug. 


=  F. 

76.3 

76.4 

76.7 

80.8 

73.8 

76.2 

79 

75.4 

79.1 

79 


Sept. 


78.1 

80.2 

80.8 

77.8 

76 

80.2 

81.3 

82.4 

80.9 

78.4 


79.6 


°F. 
7l!l 
71.3 
71.2 
73.6 
68.2 
69.4 
73.4 
69.9 
73.3 
72.4 
70.3 


71.3 


74 

70.4 

76.1 

74.1 

73.7 

76 

75.5 

75.7 

75.4 

73.5 


Oct. 


°F. 
62' 
64.6 
61.6 
63.8 
61.9 
58.1 
62.8 
58.8 
63.7 
62.7 
60.3 


61.8 


64 

64.8 

67.2 

65.1 

64.1 

65.5 

66.8 

66.4 

65.9 

62.1 


Nov. 


50.7 
50.5 
51.2 
50.6 
43.5 
50.6 
47.8 
51.3 
50.9 
48.8 


49.6 


53.8 

55 

58.3 

56.1 

53.9 

55.6 

56.5 

55.6 

56 

55.6 


74.4 


65.2  I        55.6 


CLIMATOLOGY    AND    SOILS.  149 

Table  4. — Mean  monthly  temperature  of  stations  in  the  cotton  belt — Continued. 


Station. 


SOUTHERN"  SECTION". 


Brownsville,  Tex 

Cedar  Keys,  Fla 

Galveston,  Tex 

Jacksonville,  Fla 

Mobile,  Ala 

Xew  Orleans,  La 

Pensacola,  Fla 

Rio  Grande  City,  Tex. 
San  Antonio,  Tex. 


Mean  . 


Apr. 


'  °  F. 
74.4 
69.8 
70 

68.9 
07.  1 
08.9 
67.7 
74.2 
69.4 
Savannah,  Ga. 66.6 


May 


°  F. 

79.3 
75.5 

76.1 

72 

74.2 

74.9 

73.4 

80.9 

74.8 

73.2 


75.4 


June. 


80. 

80. 
79.8 
85.  5 
81.2 
79.6 


81.3 


July. 


OF. 
83.8 
82 

84.3 
82.9 
82.6 
82.7 
81.4 
87.4 
83.5 
82.4 


83.3 


°  F. 
83.1 
81.8 
83.5 
81.7 
80.7 
81.8 
80.9 
86.3 
82.6 
79.1 


Sept. 


°  F. 
79.7 
79.5 
79.3 
78.3 
74.8 
78.5 
77.7 
81.6 
77.2 


Oct. 


82.1 


0  F. 
70.1 
72.6 

72.6 
70.5 
68.2 
70.4 
67.8 
74.5 
69.5 
66.9 


70.3 


Nor. 


o  jp_ 
66.8 
63.5 
62.3 
62.5 
58.5 
61 

59.4 
64.9 
58.3 
58.6 


61.5 


Table  5. — Mean  maximum  temperature  of  stations  in  the  cotton  belt. 


NORTHERN  SECTION. 

Atlanta,  Ga 

Charlotte,  N.  C 

Chattanooga,  Tenn 

El  Paso.  Tex 

Fort  Davis,  Tex 

Fort  Elliott,  Tex 

Fort  Smith,  Ark 

Knoxville.  Tenn 

Little  Rock,  Ark , 

Memphis,  Tenn 

Nashville,  Tenn 

Mean 

MIDDLE  SECTION. 

Auburn,  Ala 

Augusta,  Ga 

Charleston,  S.  C 

Hatteras,  N.  C 

Kitty  Hawk,  N.  C 

Montgomery,  Ala 

Palestine,  Tex 

Shre  veport,  La 

Vicksburg,  Miss 

Wilmington,  N.  C 

Mean 

SOUTHERN  SECTION. 

Brownsville,  Tex 

Cedar  Keys,  Fla 

Galveston,  Tex 

Jacksonville,  Fla 

Mobile,  Ala 

New  Orleans,  La 

Pensacola,  Fla 

Rio  Grande  City,  Tex 

San  Antonio,  Tex 

Savannah,  Ga 

Mean 


Apr. 


°F. 
71 
70.4 
74.2 
80.1 
75.1 
70.9 
74 

68.3 
73.3 
71.5 
69.5 


72.6 


72.7 

75.3 

71.9 

63.2 

62.7 

76 

76.3" 

77.4 

75.4 

69.3 


May. 


72 


82.4 

76.1 

75.1 

78 

75.5 

76.1 

74.6 

87.8 

79.7 

74.7 


78 


°F. 
78.3 
78.9 
79.6 
88.9 
82.9 
77.3 
80.3 
77.6 
79.5 
79.4 
78.2 


80.1 


80.9 

83.4 

79.5 

72.5 

72.9 

83.8 

81.2 

84 

82.9 

76.6 


June.      July. 


°F. 
84.' 3 
85.4 
85.3 
97.6 
90.4 
85.6 
87.6 
84.1 
86.7 


°F. 
86.' 7 
87.9 
87.9 


90.6 
92.6 
87.1 
90.1 
90.1 
89.1 


87.2 


84.8 
89.1 
86.4 
79.2 
80.8 
89.8 
88.4 
91 


84.8 

91.8 

88.9 

82.6 

84.5 

91.9 

92 

93.7 

91.7 

86.7 


79.8 


86.2 

81.9 

81.5 

83.6 

83.2 

82 

80.1 

91.5 

84.7 

81.4 


90.2 

86.4 

87.4 

89 

88.8 

87.2 

86.1 

96.7 

91.2 

87.5 


83.6 


91.3 
87.9 
89.6 
91.1 
90.8 
89.1 
87.9 
99.2 
94.1 
90.1 


91.1 


Aug.       Sept. 


OF. 
84.3 
85.2 
85.6 
94.4 
83.3 
87.8 
89.9 
85 
88.1 


°F. 
78^8 
79.9 
80.3 
86.7 
79.6 
81.9 
84.5 
79.9 
82.2 
81.2 
79.7 


81.3 


89.3 

87 

81.9 

80.1 

88.6 

91.3 

92.4 

90.2 

85.9 


87.3 


91.3 

87.9 

88.7 

89.7 

88.2 

88.2 

87.6 

98 

93.2 

87.8 


82.8 


87.6 
86.1 
84.1 
85.6 
85.7 
84.8 
84.6 
92.1 
86.7 
82.9 


Oct. 


OF. 
70.5 
71.3 
71.1 
78.2 
74 

70.3 
74.5 
69.5 
73 
71.3 
70.3 


Nov. 


OF. 
60.4 
60 

59.6 
64.9 
62.8 
56.3 
61.4 
57.4 
60.1 
59 
57.8 


72 


00 


82.7 

74.7 

63.8 

84.6 

75.2 

65.4 

82.2 

74.1 

65.6 

78.8 

70.2 

61.7 

79.1 

69.6 

59.9 

85.3 

75.  5 

65.3 

85.2 

77.1 

66.1 

85.2 

76.6 

65.4 

84.3 

75.2 

65.4 

81.1 

69.1 

64.7 

73.7 


83.8 

79.2 

77.6 

78.3 

77 

77.3 

75.6 

85.2 

80.1 

74.7 


64.3 


74.9 
70.6 
67.6 
71.1 
67.4 
68.1 
67.6 
74.9 
68.6 
67.3 


69. 


150  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Table  6. — Mean  minimum  temperature  of  stations  in  the  cotton  belt. 


Station. 


NORTHERN  SECTION. 

Atlanta,  Ga 

Charlotte,  H".  C 

Chattanooga,  Tenn 

El  Paso,  Tex 

Fort  Davis,  Tex 

Port  Elliott,  Tex 

Fort  Sm  ith,  Ark 

Knoxville,  Tenn 

Little  Rock,  Ark 

Memphis,  Tenn 

Nashville,  Tenn 

Mean 

MIDDLE  SECTION. 

Auburn,  Ala 

Augusta,  Ga 

Charleston,  S.  C 

Hatteras,  K.  C 

Kitty  Hawk,  N.  C 

Montgomery,  Ala 

Palestine,  Tex 

Shreveport,  La 

Vicksburg,  Miss 

Wilmington,  N.  C 

Mean 

SOUTHERN  SECTION. 

Brownsville,  Tex 

Cedar  Keys,  Fla 

Galveston,  Tex 

Jacksonville,  Fla 

Mobile,  A  la 

New  Orleans,  La 

Pensacola.  Fla 

Eio  Grande  City,  Tex 

San  Antonio,  Tex 

Savannah,  Ga 

Mean 


Apr. 


°F. 
52.  2 
49.4 
52.2 
48.4 
46.3 
43.4 
51.7 
47.7 
53.7 
53.4 
49.7 

49.8 


54 

53.8 

56.  9 

50.6 

49.3 

55.6 

57 

57.3 

56.7 

51.7 


54.8 


66.5 
63.4 
64.9 
59.7 
58.7 
61.8 
60.8 
60.5 
59.2 
57.4 


61.3 


May. 


°F. 
59.6 
58.7 
58.2 
57.3 
54 

52.1 
57.6 
55.8 
60.9 
61.1 
57.5 


57.5 


61.9 

61.6 

65.1 

61.8 

58.9 

63 

62 

64 

63.4 

57.7 


61.9 


72.3 

69 

70.7 

60.4 

65.1 

67.7 

66.7 

70.3 

64.8 

65.1 


67.2 


Jinn 


°F. 
67.2 
66.  3 
06.1 
65.7 
62.2 
61.8 
66.8 
64.3 
68.8 
69 
66.  5 


65.  4 


68.8 

69.3 

66.3 

68.9 

67.6 

71.1 

09.7 

71 

70.5 

67.9 


69.1 


75.1 
74.3 
77.1 
72.5 
72.1 
74.1 
73.6 
74.3 
71.2 
71.7 


73.6 


July, 


°F. 
70 

69.3 
69.2 
68.7 
64.  3 
65.7 
70.3 
67.4 
72.  1 
72.7 
70.  1 


69 


71.2 

72.6 

69.3 

72.6 

72 

73.3 

72.6 

73.9 

73 

72.2 


Aug. 


°F. 

68.4 

67.6 

67.8 

67.2 

62.  3 

64.6 

68.3 

65.8 

70 

70.4 

67.7 


67.  3 


69.4 

71 

74.5 

72.7 

72 

71.7 

71.3 

72.3 

71.6 

70.9 


72.2 


76.3 

77.5 

79 

74.6 

74.4 

76.2 

74.8 

75.6 

72.9 

74.6 


71.1 


74.9 

75.6 

78.2 

73.7 

73.2 

75.4 

74.2 

74.6 

72 

70.4 


75.0 


Sept. 


°F. 
03.4 
62.  6 
62 

60.4 
56.8 
56.9 
62.3 
59.8 
64.4 
63.6 
60.9 


61.2 


65.4 

66.1 

70 

69.  4 

68.3 

66.7 

65.  9 

60.2 

66.4. 

65.8 


Oct. 


OF. 

53.  6 

51.8 
52.1 
49.4 
49.7 
45.9 
51.1 
48.1 

54.  3 
54 
50.  3 


Nov. 


°F. 
43. 4 
41.4 
41.4 
37.6 
38.3 
30.  8 
39.  C 
38.2 
42.5 
42.8 
39.8 


50.  9 


67 


71.9 

72.9 

74.4 

71 

63.9 

72.1 

70.9 

71.  1 

67.7 

09 


53.  4 

54.4 

00.2 

60 

58.6 

55.6 

56.4 

56.2 

56.5 

55.1 


56.6 


39.  0 


43.7 
44.6 
50.9 
50.4 
47.9 
45.9 
46.9 
45.7 
46.7 
46.5 


46.9 


66.4 

66 

67.5 

62.8 

59.3 

63.4 

62.1 

63.7 

58.9 

59.1 


70.5 


62.9 


58.6 

56.4 

57 

53.8 

49.6 

53.9 

51.2 

54.9 

48.1 

49.9 


53.  3 


These  tables  show  a  long  season  of  uniformly  warm  conditions, 
especially  in  the  middle  and  southern  sections,  which  are  very  favorable 
to  the  production  of  cotton. 

Table  7  gives  the  average  rainfall,  with  the  number  of  rainy  days  and 
the  number  of  clear  days,  for  the  month  of  May  in  the  three  sections 
of  the  cotton  belt  from  1871  to  1891,  inclusive.  The  detailed  informa- 
tion for  the  several  stations  is  not  given  in  the  bulletin  from  ^vhich 
these  tables  are  taken. 


CLIMATOLOGY    AND    SOILS. 


151 


Table  7. — Average  rainfall,  average  number  of  rainy  days,  and  average  number  of  clear 
days  for  the  month  of  May  for  the  years  1871  to  1S91,  inclusive. 

[These  averages  were  obtained  from  data  furnished  by  all  regular  stations  throughout  the  cotton  belt.] 


Northern  cotton  belt. 

Middle  cotton  belt. 

Southern  cotton  belt. 

Tear. 

Rainfall. 

Num- 
ber of 
rainy 
days. 

Num- 
ber of 
clear 
days. 

Rainfall. 

Num- 
ber of 
rainy 
days. 

Num- 
ber of 
clear 
days. 

Rainfall. 

Num- 
ber of 
rainy 
days. 

Num- 
ber of 
clear 
days. 

1871 

Inches. 

4.66 

3.62 

5.56 

1.06 

2.97 

5.94 

1.53 

3 

3.52 

4.22 

3.34 

5.89 

3.34 

5.20 

4.35 

2.83 

3.68 

3.92 

2.51 

4.05 

2.67 

12 
10 
12 

6 
12 
10 

6 
11 

8 

8 
11 
11 

11 
12 

7 
12 
12 

7 
13 

6 

8 
11 

4 
13 
10 

9 

14 
11 
13 
13 
10 
10 
15 
11 
11 
13 
11 
10 
15 
14 
13 

Inches. 
6.12 
7.78 
7.63 
2.97 
2.79 
5.24 
3 

5.07 
3.54 
3.66 
2.57 
3.80 
3.66 
6.29 
6.57 
2.88 
4.06 
5.27 
2.66 
5.76 
2.85 

8 

10 

12 

7 

7 

10 

6 

9 

10 

9 

8 

8 

6 

8 

12 

6 

11 

11 

6 

10 

6 

16 
12 

8 
14 
11 

9 
15 
12 
13 
14 
10 

8 
11 

9 

8 
16 
10 

8 
15 
12 
13 

Inches. 
4.30 
2.78 
8.86 
2.94 
3.20 
3 

1.67 
4.37 
3 

4.86 
2.40 
4.40 
4.32 
5.24 
5.40 
2.08 
3.90 
4.54 
1.08 
4.24 
1.92 

9 
6 

13 
6 
7 
6 
6 
9 
6 

10 
7 
8 
7 

10 

11 
4 
9 

10 
4 

10 
4 

9 

1872 

10 

1873    

7 

1874 

13 

1875 

12 

1876         

12 

1877 

11 

1878 

9 

1879 

14 

1880 

10 

1881 

11 

1882 

8 

1883    

11 

1884           

12 

1885    

7 

1886 

15 

1887 

10 

1888 

10 

1889 

15 

1890 

12 

1891 

13 

Mean 

3.71 

10 

11 

4.48 

9 

12 

3.74 

8 

11 

Table  8  gives  tlie  normal  precipitation,  the  average  number  of  rainy 
days,  of  clear  days,  and  of  cloudy  days  at  the  several  stations  of  the 
three  different  sections  of  the  cotton  belt  for  the  months  of  June,  July, 
August,  and  September,  which,  together  with  the  month  of  May,  are 
the  most  important  months  of  the  crop  season. 

Table  8. — Precipitation  for  June,  July,  August,  and  September  in  the  cotton  belt. 


Normal  precipitation. 


Average  number  of 
rainy  days. 


June.!  July.  Aug.    Sept.  June.  July.  Aug.    Sept. 


Average  number  of 
clear  davs. 


June.  July.  Aug.    Sept 


NORTHERN'    SECTION. 


In. 

4.41 
4.67 
4.37 

53 


Atlanta,  Ga 

Charlotte,  N.  C 

Chattanooga,  Tenn . . 

El  Paso,  Tex 

Tort  Davis,  Tex '  2.  09  I 

Fort  Elliott,  Tex |  3.18 

Fort  Smith,  Ark |  4.27 

Knox ville,  Tenn 4.29 

Little  Rock,  Ark j  4.  39 

Memphis,  Tenn j  5 

Nashville,  Tenn 4. 34 


Mean 3. 77 


MIDDLE  SECTION. 


Auburn.  Ala 

Augusta,  Ga 

Hatterae,  N.  C 

Kitty  Hawk,  N.C- 
Montgomery,  Ala. 

Palestine,  Tex 

Shreveport.  La  . . . 
Vicksburg,  Miss  . . 
Wilmington,  N.  C. 


5.28 
4.24 
4.86 
4.81 
4.92 
3.51 
3.57 
4.35 
5.94 


In. 

4.63 
5.86 
3.72 
2.17 
3.31 
2.32 
4.09 
4.37 
3.88 
3.29 
4.54 


3.83 


4.37 
5.17 
6.33 
5.81 
4.24 
2.82 
3.68 
4.  15 
7.27 


In. 
4.39 
5.46 
4.16 
1.87 
4.17 
3.27 
3.65 
4.28 
3.92 
3.82 
3.62 


In. 
4.21 

3.24 
4.24 
1.22 
2.90 
1.77 
3.61 
3.06 
3.23 
3.23 


12 
12 

14.3 
4 

8.2 
6.9 
10 

13.3 
11.6 
11.6 
11.2 


3.87 


Mean 4.60  I  4.87 


4.20 
4.83 
6.52 
7.48 
3.80 
2.51 

2.  05 

3.  50 
7.-80 


3.29 
3.74 
6.61 
5.18 
3.11 
3.21 
4.25 
3.85 
6.70 


10.2 
11.3 
10.6 
10.8 
12.3 
7.9 
8.4 
10.9 
12 


4.  74  I  4.  43      10.  5 


10 

12.2 

13.1 
8.4 

10 
5.3 
8.7 

12.7 

10 

10 

10.5 


13.1 

10.6 

13.2 

9.4 

10.8 

8.3 

8.4 

12.6 

8.9 

9.9 

9.4 


9.7 
8.9 
10.9 
5.3 
7.4 
5.3 
8.1 
9.6 
S.  4 
8.6 
9.3 


8.7 
8.8 
19.5 
15.7 
13.2 
11.6 
8.4 
10.1 
9.2 
6.4 


8.9 
13.5 
15.4 
14.5 
13.9 
10.2 
11.3 
11.6 


9.1 
8.6 
15 
14 

16.1 
15.3 
10.3 
14.5 
13.7 
11.2 


12.6 

10.5 

11.3 

16.7 

13.7 

17.1 

14.9 

13.5 

13.4 

13 

11.4 


10 


10 
11.2 
11.  1 
11.4 
12 
7.  1 
8.7 
11.3 
15.1 


10.4  I     8.3   -10.8 


13.5 


12.4 

10.8 

13.8 

12.9 

12 

6.7 

5.7 

8.7 

13.7 


7.8 
5.4 
8.6 
8.2 
8.3 
9.1 
9.8 


10.8     10.6 


6.4 

7.5 

8.1 

8.8 

10.2 

11.3 

10.6 

9.7 

7.7 

7.5 

8.7 

13.9 

9.3 

11.4 

9.3 

9.7 

8.7 

8.8 

9.4 
8.2 

11.2 
8.4 
8.3 

13 

13.6 

11.2 
8.5 


10.2 


10.2 

13.6 

11.5 

11.7 

12.9 

13.9 

12 

10.4 

11.6 


152  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Table  8. — Precipitation  for  June,  July,  August,  and  September,  etc. — Continued. 


Station. 


SOUTHERN  SECTION. 

Brownsville,  Tex 

Cedar  Keys,  Pla 

Galveston,  Tex 

Jacksonville,  Fla 

Mobile,  Ala 

New  Orleans,  La 

Pensaeola,  Fla 

Eio  Grande  City,  Tex. 

San  Antonio,  Tex 

Savannah,  Ga 

Mean 


Normal  precipitation. 


June.  July.   Aug.   Sept. 


In. 

3.25 

G.  83 
5.76 
0.03 
6.06 
6.  66 
5.85 
2.27 
2.46 
6.75 


5.18 


In. 

2.22 
8.68 
3.  04 
6.36 
6.60 
6.  38 
6.55 
1.29 
2.68 
5.34 


la. 

3.  00 
7.72 
2.  04 
6.80 
6.41 
6.02 
8.13 
2.94 
3.45 
7.65 


5.59 


In. 

7.73 
5.37 
7.07 
8.06 
5.06 
4.82 
5.25 
3.  78 
4.16 
5.89 


5.71 


Average  number  of 
rainy  days. 


June.  July.    Aug.    Sept, 


6.9 
11.3 

7.2 
14.8 
12.9 
13.8 
12.4 

4.8 

6.3 
13.1 


10.3 


4.5 
14.5 

8.6 
16.7 
15.1 
15.8 
14.7 

3.6 

6 
12!8 


11.2 


7.3 
13.1 
10.3 
15.5 
12.8 
14.5 
13.6 
4.9 
0.7 
13.5 


11.2 


11.5 

10.1 

11 

14.1 
9.5 

10.6 

10 
9.4 
9.7 

11.5 


10.7 


Average  number  of 
clear  days. 


June.  July.   Aug.   Sept 


13.  5 
6.2 

11.7 
7.7 
8.1 
8.1 

10 

14.1 
8.4 
7.3 


9.5 


15. 1 

7.7 
13.2 

8.8 

7 

8 

9.1 
19 
10.8 

7.9 


10.6      10 


12.4 
8.7 

13.  3 
8.7 
8.1 
8.1 

10.5 

14.6 
8.7 
7.7 


11.1 
11.9 
12.6 

9.1 
11.2 
10.9 
J  2.  4 
11.5 
10.2 

8.7 


10.9 


Station. 


NORTHERN  SECTION. 

Atlanta,  Ga 

Charlotte,  N.  C 

Chattanooga,  Tenn 

El  Paso,  Tex 

Fort  Davis,  Tex 

Fort  Elliott,  Tex 

Fort  Smith.  Ark 

Knoxville,  Tenn 

Little  Rock,  Ark 

Memphis,  Tenn 

Nashville,  Tenn 

Mean 

.     .       MIDDLE   SECTION. 

Auburn,  Ala 

Augusta,  Ga 

Hatteras,  N.  C 

Kitty  Hawk,  N.  C 

Montgomery,  Ala 

Palestine,  Tex 

Shreveport,  La 

Vicksburg,  Miss 

Wilmington,  N.  C 

Mean 

SOUTHERN  SECTION. 

Brownsville,  Tex 

Cedar  Keys,  Fla 

Galveston,  Tex 

Jacksonville,  Fla 

Mobile,  Ala 

New  Orleans,  La 

Pensaeola.  Fla 

Eio  Grande  City,  Tex 

San  Antonio,  Tex 

Savannah,  Ga 

Mean 


Average  number  of  partly 
cloudy  days. 


June.     July.       Aug.      Sept 


14.6 
13.3 
14.4 
9.5 
12.5 
12.8 
13 
15 

14.6 
14.7 
17.1 


14.6 


14 

14.7 
6 
13.5 
13.5 
16.1 
15.7 
15 
14.4 


13.6 


12.5 

16.6 

13.8 

15 

15 

15.5 

14.  6 

12.1 

16.1 

14.9 


14.9 
14.7 
14.6 
14.8 
11.6 
13.1 
12.2 
14.5 
14.1 
13.8 
16.1 


14 


16.6 
14.6 
13.4 
15.3 
15.8 
13.6 
15.1 
15.1 
14.4 


14.8 


12.8 
14 
14.1 
16.1 
16.3 
17.4 
15.8 
8.7 
16.2 
16.2 


14. 


15 

12.3 
15.4 
11.7 
12.6 
9.9 
9.6 
14 

12.4 
11.7 
14.2 


12.6 


15 

15 

11.8 

14.9 

16.3 

14.8 

13.9 

15.  I 

13.5 


14.4 


15.1 

13.9 

12.9 

16.4 

15.9 

17.9 

14 

10.7 

18.3 

15.3 


15 


11.7 
10.8 
12.1 
8.9 


13.3 
12.1 
11.2 
11.3 
10.7 
10.5 
9.7 
10 
10.9 


11 


12.8 

12.9 

10.7 

12.2 

12 

13.1 

12.3 

12.1 

11.8 

11.7 


12.1 


Average  number  of  cloudy 
days. 


7.4 

8 

6.1 

1 

1.8 

3.7 

5.4 

6.6 

5.3 

6.1 

6.5 


9.6 
7.2 
13.8 
5.9 
8.8 
5 
5 

5.7 
7.9 


7.6 


July. 


7.3 

8.5 

6.7 

2.7 

4 

3.4 

4.9 

6.3 

5.6 

5.6 

6 


6.9 
7.6 
6.3 

6 

7.7 

3.5 

4.5 

6.2 

7.8 


4 

7.2 

4.5 

7.3 

6.9 

6.4 

5.4 


2.5 

9.3 

3.7 

6.1 

7.7 

5.6 

6.1 

3.3 

4 

6.9 


Aug. 


9.6 

7 


4.3 
4.4 
5 

6.1 
'6.7 
4.1 
5.6 
5.6 


6.6 

7.8 

8 

7.7 

6.4 

3.2 

3.5 

4.7 

9 


3.5 

8.4 

4.8 

5.9 

7 

5 

6.5 

5.7 

4 

8 


Sept. 


5.7 

8.7 

6.6 

4.4 

5.8 

3.7 

6.5 

7 

5 

7 

7 


7.8 
7.7 
6.2 
7.2 
7.6 
6.6 
6.4 


6.1 

5.2 

6.7 

8.7. 

6.8 

6 

5.3 

6.4 

8 

9.6 

6.8 


Little  comment  is  here  made  upon  the  data  contained  in  these  tables. 
They  are  but  broad,  general  statements  of  the  climatic  conditions,  which 
can  be  used  for  general  comparisons  and  as  a  basis  for  other  more 
detailed  work. 


CLIMATOLOGY    AND    SOILS.  153 

SOIL. 

Cotton  is  at  present  cultivated  with  more  or  less  success  on  nearly 
all  kinds  of  soils  within  the  region  in  which  the  climatic  conditions  are 
favorable  to  its  growth  and  development.  It  is  grown  alike  on  light 
sandy  soils,  on  loams,  on  heavy  clay  soils,  and  on  bottom  lands,  but 
not  with  equal  success  on  all  of  these  different  types  of  soil.  On  the 
sandy  uplands  the  yield  of  cotton  is  usually  very  small;  on  clay  lands, 
especially  in  wet  seasons,  the  plants  attain  large  size,  but  yield  a  small 
amount  of  lint  in  proportion  to  the  size  of  the  plants.  This  is  also 
likely  to  be  the  case  on  bottom  lands.  The  safest  soils  for  the  crop  are 
medium  grades  of  loam.  On  the  bottom  lands  in  very  favorable  sea- 
sons the  crop  often  produces  a  very  large  yield,  but  it  is  not  so  cer- 
tain, and  in  unfavorable  seasons  the  plants  are  liable  to  disease  and  to 
insect  ravages. 

It  becomes  important  for  the  cotton  planter  to  understand  the  soils 
of  his  farm  in  order  to  get  the  greatest  possible  advantage  from  the 
soils  adapted  to  cotton  and  to  appreciate  the  fact  that  he  can  not 
hope  to  compete  successfully  in  the  production  of  cotton  on  other  kinds 
of  land.  It  is  the  purpose  of  this  chapter  to  summarize  our  present 
knowledge  of  the  relations  of  soils  to  crops  from  the  investigations 
which  have  been  carried  on  in  this  country  and ,  abroad,  not  only  to 
concentrate  the  light  upon  this  subject  for  immediate  benefit  in  its 
application  to  the  problems  of  present  interest  to  the  cotton  planter, 
but  to  stimulate  interest  in  this  subject,  which  presents  a  very  promis- 
ing field  for  investigation. 

The  study  of  soils  is  naturally  divided  into  two  parts — (1)  the  soil 
considered  merely  as  a  source  of  food  supply  for  plants  and  (2)  the  study 
of  the  physical  conditions  in  the  soils,  especially  of  moisture  and  heat, 
which  are  equally  essential  for  the  growth  and  development  of  plants. 

CHEMICAL  PROPERTIES   OF   SOILS. 

The  chemistry  of  soils  has  been  very  earnestly  studied  in  the  past 
fifty  years.  It  was  once  very  generally  believed  by  agricultural  chemists 
that  the  chemical  analyses  of  any  particular  soil  and  plant  would  show 
•what  might  be  lacking  in  the  soil  for  the  production  of  a  normal  crop 
of  the  plant.  Later  investigations  have  dispelled  this  idea,  and  have 
shown  that  there  is  no  simple  relation  between  the  chemical  analysis 
of  a  soil  and  the  crop-producing  power.  This  is  especially  marked  in 
the  case  of  nitrogen,  phosphoric  acid,  potash,  and  lime,  which  experi- 
ence has  taught  us  to  apply  to  the  soils  in  the  form  of  fertilizers.  That 
these  fertilizers  have  been  of  great  and  undoubted  value  in  the  increased 
production  of  crops  no  one  can  for  a  moment  doubt,  but  the  effect  of 
these  fertilizers  on  the  soil  in  increasing  the  yield  of  crops,  and  the  real 
principle  upon  which  we  should  apply  them  to  the  land  is  a  subject  of 


154  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

considerable  doubt  and  a  matter  of  very  diverse  opinions  among  scien- 
tific men. 

Soils,  to  a  depth  of  1  foot,  rarely  contain  less  than  0.05  per  cent  each, 
of  phosphoric  acid,  potash,  and  lime,  which  corresponds  to  about  1  ton 
of  these  substances  per  acre,  and  they  usually  contain  from  two  to 
twenty  times  this  amount.  A  soil,  however,  containing  as  much  as  10 
tons  of  phosphoric  acid  or  of  potash  or  of  lime  per  acre  may  be  natu- 
rally unproductive  or  may  be  readily  exhausted  by  injudicious  methods 
of  cropping  and  cultivation.  Crops  remove  but  a  very  small  amount 
of  mineral  food — so  little,  indeed,  that  the  loss  can  not  be  detected  by 
the  most  careful  chemical  analysis  of  the  soil  after  a  large  crop  has 
been  removed.  It  has  been  repeatedly  shown  that  very  barren  soils 
often  contain  as  much  plant  food  as  others  which  are  considered  fertile. 
It  is  strange  indeed  that  the  application  of  a  fertilizer  containing  no 
more  than  20  pounds  per  acre  of  phosphoric  acid  or  of  potash  to  a  soil 
which,  to  a  depth  of  1  foot,  already  contains  from  2,000  to  40,000  pounds, 
should  make  the  difference  between  a  poor  and  a  large  crop.  It 
is  no  unusual  thing  to  find  in  the  experience  of  farmers  and  in  the 
careful  experiments  conducted  at  the  experiment  stations  that  the 
increased  crop  due  to  this  addition  of  fertilizing  material  contains  more 
plant  food  than  is  contained  in  the  fertilizer  which  has  caused  the 
increase. 

It  is  commonly  believed  now  by  agricultural  chemists  that  the  reason 
small  quantities  of  fertilizers  have  such  an  effect  upon  soils  containing 
such  enormous  quantities  of  these  same  ingredients  is  that  only  a  very 
small  portion  of  the  plant  food  in  the  soil  is  in  a  condition  to  be  readily 
available  to  plants,  as  by  far  the  larger  proportion  of  the  plant  food  is 
in  the  form  of  minerals  which  the  plants  can  not  readily  assimilate. 

Eecent  investigations  have  therefore  been  turned  to  the  considera- 
tion of  the  amount  of  food  material  in  the  soil  which  is  readily  avail- 
able to  plants.  Two  methods  have  given  considerable  promise  of 
valuable  suggestion  as  to  the  amount  of  available  plant  food  in  soils. 
One  is  based  upon  the  assumption  that  the  available  plant  food  is  com- 
bined with  the  partially  decomposed  organic  matter  or  humus  in  the 
soil,  and  that  if  this  humus  is  extracted  and  an  analysis  made  of  it  the 
results  will  show  tfhe  amount  of  the  food  material  in  the  soil  readily' 
available  to  plants.  This  idea  has  been  strongly  advocated  by  Grau- 
deau  and  has  been  developed  in  this  country  with  valuable  results  by 
Hilgard1  and  Snyder.2 

For  years  an  effort  has  been  made  to  find  a  solvent  of  such  a  char- 
acter and  concentration  as  shall  dissolve  out  of  the  soil  itself  about  the 
same  amount  of  plant  food  that  a  plant  would  extract  through  its  roots 
during  its  season  of  growth.     Dyer3  has  made  a  very  thorough  and 

1  California  Sta.  Ept.  1891-92,  p.  241. 

2  Minnesota  Sta.  Bui.  41. 

3  Jour.  Chem.  Soc,  1894,  p.  115  (E.  S.  E.,  5,  p.  1013). 


CLIMATOLOGY    AND    SOILS.  155 

systematic  study  of  the  soils  of  some  of  the  experimental  plats  at 
Rothamsted,  and  has  obtained  some  exceedingly  interesting  and  prom- 
ising results.  He  used  as  a  solvent  a  1  per  cent  solution  of  citric  acid, 
which  lias  about  the  same  acidity  as  the  juices  expressed  from  the 
roots  of  a  large  number  of  plants  which  he  examined.  Citric  acid  was 
selected  because  it  is  an  organic  acid  very  commonly  xuesent  in  plants, 
and  is  easjT  to  obtain  in  a  comparatively  pure  state.  This  dilute  acid 
was  allowed  to  act  on  the  soil  for  a  considerable  time  at  a  certain 
temperature,  the  soil  and  solvent  being  occasionally  shaken. 

The  amount  of  plant  food  extracted  in  this  way  from  the  soil  was 
estimated,  and  was  assumed  to  be  the  amount  of  food  material  in  the 
soils  available  to  plants.  Very  striking  relations  were  shown  to  exist 
between  the  matters  extracted  by  this  process  and  the  crop  yields  from 
the  different  plats. 

A  great  deal  of  light  has  been  thrown  upon  the  chemical  constitution 
of  soils  by  these  investigations,  but  the  point  is  not  reached  at  which 
the  kind  of  crop  best  adapted  to  a  given  soil  or  the  additions  of  plant 
food  necessary  to  make  the  soil  suitable  for  crops  to  which  it  is  not  nat- 
urally adapted  can  be  predicted  with  certainty  from  a  chemical  analysis 
of  soil  and  crop.  This  is  undoubtedly  due  in  large  part  to  the  fact  that 
the  agricultural  chemist  has  paid  too  little  attention  to  the  other  con- 
ditions of  growth,  especially  to  the  physical  conditions  of  the  soil, 
which  are  of  equal  importance  with  the  chemical  composition  of  the 
soil  in  determining  crop  production. 

A  very  large  amount  of  work  has  been  done  in  this  country  in  the 
investigation  of  the  chemical  composition  of  soils  of  the  cotton  region. 
Very  valuable  and  suggestive  work  has  been  published  in  the  reports 
of  the  Kentuckj^  Geological  Survey,  in  the  reports  of  Professor  Hil- 
gard  on  the  agriculture  of  Mississippi  and  California,  and  especially  in 
the  elaborate  summary  of  the  work  of  Hilgard  and  others  in  the  Tenth 
Census.1  This  latter  report  describes  in  great  detail  the  soils  of  all  of 
the  principal  agricultural  regions  of  the  cotton  belt,  and  gives  a  great 
many  analyses  showing  their  chemical  composition  as  determined  by 
digestion  with  strong  hydrochloric  acid.     (See  p.  164.) 

The  limits  of  this  chapter  permit  of  only  the  most  general  statements 
as  to  the  results  of  the  vast  amount  of  work  done  prior  to  the  publica- 
tion of  the  Tenth  Census  and  of  the  special  investigations  undertaken 
for  the  Tenth  Census  itself  on  the  chemical  composition  of  soils  adapted 
to  cotton.  Hilgard  states,2  as  a  result  of  his  investigations  and  that 
of  his  colaborers  in  this  exhaustive  research,  that  as  a  rule  the  relative 
proportions  of  phosphoric  acid  and  of  lime  seems  to  govern  the  produc- 
tiveness of  our  virgin  soils.  A  soil  containing  only  0.05  per  cent  of 
phosphoric  acid  must  be  regarded  as  seriously  deficient  in  this  element 
unless  it  contains  a    large  amount  of  lime.     In  sandy  loam  soils  0.1 

'Tenth  Census  of  the  U.  S.,  1880,  Vols.  V  and  VI,  Cotton  Production,  parts  1  and  2. 
2  Tenth  Census  of  the  U.  S.,  1880,  Vol.  V,  Cotton  Production,  part  1,  p.  78. 


156  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

per  cent,  when  accompanied  by  a  fair  supply  of  lime,  gives  a  fair  pro- 
ductiveness for  from  eight  to  fifteen  years.  With  a  deficiency  of  lime, 
however,  twice  that  amount  will  only  serve  for  a  similar  time.  The 
maximum  amount  of  phosphoric  acid  found  in  a  pine  upland  soil  by 
his  method  of  analysis  is  about  0.25  per  cent  in  the  splendid  table-land 
soils  of  west  Tennessee  and  Mississippi.  In  the  best  bottom  soils,  or 
buckshot  soils,  of  the  Mississippi  Valley,  0.3;  in  that  of  the  black 
prairie  of  Texas,  0.46,  and  in  a  red-clay  soil  from  Tennessee,  0.563  per 
cent.  This  latter  figure  would  imply  the  presence  of  22,000  pounds  of 
phosphoric  acid  per  acre  to  a  depth  of  1  foot,  soluble  in  the  acid  of 
the  strength  used  in  the  chemical  analyses. 

Virgin  soils  containing  less  than  0.06  per  cent  of  potash  may  be 
usually  assumed  to  be  deficient  in  available  potash,  and  an  application 
of  potash  to  such  soils  may  be  expected  to  give  beneficial  results. 
Sometimes,  however,  a  soil  very  rich  in  lime  and  phosphoric  acid 
shows  good  productiveness  despite  a  very  low  potash  percentage.  The 
amount  of  potash  in  heavy  clay  upland  soil  and  clay  loams  ranges  from 
about  0.8  to  0.5  per  cent,  in  lighter  loams  from  0.45  to  0.30,  in  sandy 
loams  it  falls  below  0.3,  and  in  sandy  soils  of  great  depth  it  may  fall 
below  0.1  per  cent  and  still  give  good  productiveness  and  durability, 
depending  somewhat  upon  the  amount  of  lime  and  phosphoric  acid 
within  the  soil.  It  will  thus  be  seen  that  the  percentage  of  potash 
varies  somewhat  with  the  amount  of  clay.  The  buckshot  soil  of  the 
Mississippi  bottom  contains  1.3  per  cent  of  potash  and  1.4  per  cent  of 
lime  and  is  jet  black  with  humus  and  may  well  serve  as  the  type  of  a 
fertile  soil.  Hilgard  states  that  in  his  experience  few  of  the  soils  of 
the  South  contain  less  potash  than  the  quantities  above  reported  and 
that  potash  manures  are  not  usually  necessary  for  the  exhausted  soils 
of  the  South  „  He  also  states  that  the  universal  preference  given  to 
phosphoric  and  nitrogenous  fertilizers  in  the  West  and  South  is  in 
accord  with  this  inference. 

Hilgard  states  as  a  result  of  his  experience  that  0.1  per  cent  of  lime 
in  the  lightest  sandy  soils  gives  character  to  the  native  timber  growth. 
In  clay  loams  there  should  be  not  less  than  0.5  per  cent,  and  the  amount 
may  rise  advantageously  to  1  or  even  2  per  cent. 

These  conclusions  of  Hilgard  as  the  result  of  the  extensive  inves- 
tigations for  the  Tenth  Census  still  stand,  and  are  likely  to  stand  for  a 
long  time  to  come,  as  the  standards  by  which  we  will  compare  the 
chemical  composition  of  the  soils  in  this  country.  They  are  very  gen- 
eral, but  it  is  not  possible  at  present  to  give  more  specific  statements. 
But  little  work  has  been  done  upon  the  chemical  composition  of  the 
soils  of  the  cotton  belt  since  the  completion  of  the  investigations  made 
for  the  Tenth  Census. 

More  recently  Pagnoul1  states  as  a  result  of  his  own  experiments, 
and  from  the  experiments  of  Heherain,  Joulie,  and  Dellisse,  that  a  soil 


Carres  Arables  du  Pas-de-Calais,  Arras,  1894  (E.  S.  R.,  6,  p.  118). 


CLIMATOLOGY   AND    SOILS.  157 

containing  less  than  0.1  per  cent  of  phosphoric  acid  will  probably  be 
deficient  in  that  substance  and  will  be  benefited  by  the  application  of 
phosphates.  Miintz  points  out  that  this  limit  should  not  be  arbitrarily 
fixed,  as  it  would  depend  largely  upon  the  form  of  combination  of  the 
phosphoric  acid  in  the  soil.  In  regard  to  the  form  in  which  phosphoric 
acid  should  be  applied,  it  is  stated  that  if  the  soil  is  calcareous  super- 
phosphates can  be  used  with  advantage;  if  the  soil  contains  less  than  0.1 
per  cent  of  lime,  superphosphates  are  apt  to  be  injurious  and  a  phos- 
phate containing  free  lime,  such  as  Thomas  slag,  should  be  used. 
Precipitated  phosphates  are  well  adapted  to  the  soils  which  need  phos- 
phoric acid,  but  produce  their  best  results  on  soils  which  contain 
smaller  amounts  of  lime.  Natural  phosphates  are  used  to  the  best 
advantage  on  humus  soils  when  applied  in  a  very  finely  ground 
condition.  The  author  states  as  a  result  of  his  investigations  that  a 
soil  containing  0.25  per  cent  of  potash  is  not  likely  to  respond  profit- 
ably to  an  application  of  potash  salts. 

.  The  normal  proportion  of  nitrogen  in  good  soils  is  stated  to  be  about 
0.1  per  cent.  Whether  soils  containing  as  much  nitrogen  as  this  will 
be  benefited  by  an  application  of  nitrogenous  fertilizers  will  depend 
largely  upon  the  condition  of  the  nitrogen  in  the  soil  and  upon  the 
demands  of  the  plant.  When  the  amount  of  nitrogen  is  below  this 
limit  nitrogenous  fertilizers  are  considered  almost  always  indispensable. 
These  views  as  to  the  chemical  composition  of  soils  and  their  relation 
to  plant  growth  represent  the  views  held  at  present  both  in  this  conn- 
try  and  abroad.  They  are  the  results  of  a  vast  amount  of  chemical 
investigation.  It  will  be  seen  that  they  are  very  general  and  that  no 
specific  deductions  can  be  drawn  from  the  chemical  analysis  of  a  soil 
alone. 

PHYSICAL    STRUCTURE   OF    SOILS. 

In  the  preceding  section  the  results  of  the  chemical  investigations  of 
sods  have  been  given  as  these  bear  upon  crop  production.  It  has  been 
shown  in  the  first  place  that  the  total  amount  of  plant  foods  in  the  soil 
has  no  simple  or  direct  bearing  upon  the  relation  of  soils  to  crop  pro- 
duction. It  is  very  generally  believed,  however,  as  a  result  of  the 
investigations  in  this  country  and  abroad,  that  fertile  soils  should  have 
a  certain  quantity  of  each  of  these  plant  foods  as  determined  by  the 
extraction  of  the  soil  by  strong  acids.  If  the  amount  falls  below  the 
limits  which  have  been  assigned,  experience  has  shown  that  in  most 
cases  the  soils  will  respond  to  fertilizers  or  manures  containing  the 
elements  which  are  thus  shown  to  be  deficient  in  the  soil.  But  occasion- 
ally very  poor,  worn  out,  and  exhausted  soils  contain  as  much  of  these 
plant  foods  as  would  correspond  with  the  arbitrary  limits  which  have 
been  set  for  soils  of  average  fertility.  It  has  been  stated  likewise  that 
promising  investigations  are  being  carried  on  with  different  solvents, 
and  that  it  is  believed  by  many  that  it  will  be  possible  to  find  a  solvent 


158  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

of  a  nature  and  strength  which  will  indicate  very  clearly  the  amount  of 
plant  food  in  the  soil  which  is  available  to  plants. 

We  come  now  to  a  consideration  of  the  physical  texture  and  struc- 
ture of  soils  and  especially  to  the  conditions  of  moisture  they  maintain, 
which  have  a  most  important  bearing-  upon  crop  production,  and  which 
undoubtedly  are  often  of  such  influence  that  they  completely  over- 
shadow in  importance  the  chemical  composition  of  the  soil. 

The  classification  of  soils  into  sandy,  sandy  loam,  loam,  clay  loam, 
clay,  and  bottom  lauds  has  a  very  distinctive  and  important  meaning 
to  the  farmer,  for  he  recognizes  certain  properties  characteristic  of 
each  of  these  classes  of  soils  and  has  learned  from  experience  to  expect 
certain  results. 

On  the  light,  sandy  uplands  the  yield  per  acre  is  almost  invariably 
small;  on  stiff  clay  lauds  and  on  bottom  lands,  especially  in  wet  sea- 
sons, the  plants  are  inclined  to  make  an  excessive  growth  of  the  leafy 
parts  and  to  put  on  little  fruit  in  proportion  to  the  size  of  the  plants 
and  the  crops  to  be  late  in  maturing.  It  is  also  a  recognized  fact  and 
a  matter. of  wide  experience  that  plants  growing  on  some  of  these 
typical  soils  are  much  more  subject  to  diseases  and  to  insect  ravages 
under  unfavorable  climatic  conditions  than  on  other  soils.  The  safest 
soil  for  cotton  is  found  to  be  a  medium  loam,  although,  as  stated 
elsewhere,  in  favorable  seasons  and  under  favorable  conditions  very 
large  yields  are  obtained  from  the  heavier  clay  soils  and  on  bottom 
lands. 

The  texture  of  the  soils,  therefore,  or  the  relative  amount  of  sand  and 
clay,  has  an  important  bearing  on  crop  production,  as  has  been  shown 
in  the  experience  of  farmers  throughout  the  cotton  belt.  It  remains 
to  be  seen  what  these  differences  are  which  are  dependent  upon  the 
relative  amount  of  sand  and  clay,  which  the  farmer  can  recognize  at  a 
glance,  as  he  can  not  recognize  differences  in  the  chemical  composition 
of  the  soil. 

The  first  thing  which  is  very  apparent  in  the  consideration  of  this 
subject  is  that  the  character  of  the  season,  and  especially  of  the  amount 
and  distribution  of  the  rainfall,  has  a  very  marked  and  important  influ- 
ence upon  the  yield  of  cotton  on  all  of  these  different  types  of  soil. 
It  is  no  unusual  thing  for  a  cotton  crop  on  a  heavy  clay  or  rich  bottom 
land  to  be  so  badly  diseased  or  to  be  so  injured  by  insect  ravages  as  to 
cause  an  entire  failure  of  the  crop,  or  to  be  so  delayed  in  maturing, 
by  reason  of  unfavorable  climatic  conditions  and  rank  vegetative 
growth,  that  the  crop  does  not  mature  before  frost.  In  more  favorable 
seasons  the  yield  from  these  same  lands  may  be  enormous.  Every 
farmer  also  recognizes  when  he  puts  in  his  crop  the  great  uncertainty 
as  to  the  yield,  and  it  is  no  uncommon  thing  for  the  yield  of  cotton  for 
an  entire  State  to  be  double  one  year  what  it  was  the  previous  year. 
It  is  likewise  a  matter  of  very  common  experience  that  the  cotton  in 
one  field  or  tract  of  land  will  be  much  more  affected  by  unfavorable 


CLIMATOLOGY   AND    SOILS.  159 

climatic  conditions  than  the  crop  in  an  adjacent  field  of  perhaps  a 
different  character  of  soil. 

We  see  here  an  indication  of  the  great  influence  the  conditions  of 
rainfall  and  moisture  have  upon  the  cotton  crop,  and  we  have  indica- 
tions also  that  these  different  types  of  soil  maintain  very  different  con- 
ditions of  moisture  for  the  plants.  It  may  be  said,  in  fact,  that  while 
climatic  conditions  determine  the  general  distribution  of  plants — make 
it  impracticable,  for  example,  to  grow  cotton  in  a  northern  latitude — 
the  texture  of  the  soils,  or  the  relative  amount  of  sand  and  clay  they 
contain,  and  the  relation  of  these  differently  textured  soils  to  moisture 
largely  determine  the  local  distribution  of  plants  and  explain  why 
some  soils  are  adapted  to  cotton,  wheat,  tobacco,  or  to  truck  farming, 
and  why  other  soils  are  not  so  well  adapted  to  these  crops. 

As  a  rule,  the  relative  amount  of  moisture  maintained  by  different 
soils  for  crops  under  normal  conditions  depends  upon  the  resistance  the 
soil  offers  to  the  descent  of  the  rainfall. 

The  actual  resistance,  and  therefore  the  relative  amount  of  moisture, 
maintained  by  different  soils  depends  upon  the  amount  of  space  in 
the  soils  for  the  water  to  enter;  upon  the  number  of  grains  of  sand, 
silt,  and  clay,  for  this  will  determine  how  much  the  space  is  divided  up; 
upon  how  these  grains  are  arranged,  for  this  will  have  an  influence  upon 
the  resistance  or  the  friction  the  soil  offers  to  the  descent  of  the  rain- 
fall; upon  the  amount  of  organic  matter  in  the  soil,  and  upon  the 
depth  of  the  soil. 

Soils  contain,  as  a  rule,  about  50  per  cent  by  volume  of  empty  space; 
that  is,  in  1  cubic  foot  of  soil  there  will  be  one-half  cubic  foot  of  space 
into  which  water  or  air  can  enter.  In  a  sandy  soil  this  space  will  not 
be  divided  up  so  much  as  in  a  clay  soil;  the  sand  having  fewer  grains 
the  spaces  between  the  grains  are  larger,  so  there  is  less  friction  and 
the  water  moves  downward  more  quickly.  These  sandy  soils  will  not, 
therefore,  maintain  so  much  moisture  for  the  plants.  The  particles  of 
clay  soils,  on  the  other  hand,  are  so  exceedingly  minute,  and  there  are 
such  a  vast  number  of  them  in  the  soil,  that  the  spaces  between  them 
are  exceedingly  small  and  offer  a  great  resistance  to  the  descent  of  rain, 
so  that  the  water  moves  very  slowly  and  a  large  amount  is  maintained 
for  the  plants.  A  strong  clay  soil  will  usually  contain  three  or  four 
times  as  much  water  as  a  sandy  soil,  and  this  has  a  very  important 
effect  upon  the  growth  of  cotton. 

Advantage  is  taken  of  this  fact  in  greenhouses,  but  in  nature,  of 
course,  we  can  not  control  the  conditions.  In  the  latter  case  we  must 
take  the  amount  of  rain  which  falls,  but  our  different  soils  being 
so  different  in  texture  and  in  the  resistance  which  they  offer  to 
the  descent  of  the  rainfall,  maintain  quite  as  different  conditions  of 
moisture  as  are  supplied  in  practice  under  artificial  conditions  of  green- 
house culture.  Light  sandy  soils,  being  moderately  dry,  force  plants 
to  an  early  maturity,  and  these  soils  are  used  at  present  for  the  very 


160  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

profitable  truck  farming  which  has  developed  into  such  an  important 
industry  in  recent  years.  Such  soils  are  not  adapted  to  wheat  or  grass, 
not  necessarily  because  they  are  deficient  in  any  particular  food  required 
for  these  crops,  but  because  the  dry  conditions  force  the  plants  to  an 
early  maturity  and  the  yield  per  acre  is  small.  Clay  soils,  on  the  other 
hand,  are  adapted  to  wheat  and  grass,  because  they  maintain  uniformly 
moist  conditions  and  the  plants  have  a  slow  and  prolonged  growing 
period  before  it  is  time  to  mature  seed.  Clay  soils  are  not  adapted  to 
early  truck,  because  the  crops  are  so  late  in  maturing  that  they  lose  the 
advantage  of  the  high  market  prices. 

The  resistance  or  the  friction  in  the  soil  determines  the  proportion 
of  the  rainfall  which  will  be  held  back  for  the  use  of  plants,  and  deter- 
mines largely  the  amount  of  moisture  which  different  soils  maintain. 
There  must,  however,  be  some  automatic  power  to  move  this  water 
from  place  to  place  in  the  soil  and  deliver  it  to  the  roots  of  plants  as  it 
is  needed.  This  power  exists  in  the  soil  in  the  force  of  surface  tension, 
or,  as  it  is  more  commonly  called,  capillary  force,  which  may  move  water 
m  any  direction  in  the  soil,  either  up  or  down  or  laterally. 

Fertilizers  have  an  important  effect  upon  this  force  of  surface  ten- 
sion. Lime,  kainit,  salt,  plaster,  and  acid  phosphate  increase  the  sur- 
face tension  and  therefore  increase  the  force  which  moves  water  to 
the  plant.  This  probably  explains  many  facts  commonly  met  with  in 
practice. 

A  cotton  soil  should  maintain  very  uniform  conditions  of  moisture, 
for  any  marked  or  sudden  variation,  especially  during  the  growing 
period,  is  apt  to  affect  the  vitality  of  the  plant  and  have  a  marked 
effect  upon  the  development  of  the  crop.  During  the  early  growing 
season  of  the  plant,  up  to  the  first  of  August,  the  soil  should  be  con- 
tinuously moist,  but  not  wet.  A  sandy  soil,  as  a  rule,  is  not  sufficiently 
retentive  of  moisture,  and  the  supply  of  moisture  is  so  inadequate  that 
the  plants  are  small  and  are  forced  to  an  early  maturity  before  they 
have  gathered  sufficient  food  material  for  a  normal  crop.  On  the  other 
hand,  a  clay  soil  or  a  bottom  land  is  liable  to  maintain  too  much  mois- 
ture, and  the  plant  takes  on  an  excessive  growth.  If  this  condition  is 
checked  at  the  proper  time  and  the  plant  is  induced  to  mature  fruit, 
the  yield  may  be  very  large,  but  if  this  condition  continues  and  the 
soil  remains  continuously  moist  after  the  first  of  August,  the  plants 
develop  in  a  very  luxuriant  way,  but  with  little  tendency  to  put  on 
fruit.  Such  soils  may  be  greatly  benefited  by  underdrainage,  whereby 
the  excess  of  water  is  artificially  removed  from  the  soil.  This  exces- 
sive growth  may  be  checked  also  by  fertilizers,  especially  by  heavy 
application  of  phosphoric  acid,  which  has  a  tendency  to  check  the 
vegetative  growth  and  hasten  the  maturity  of  the  plant. 

The  safest  soil  for  the  cotton  crop  is  a  deep  loam,  naturally  well 
drained,  but  sufficiently  retentive  of  moisture  to  maintaiu  a  uniform 
supply  throughout  the  entire  growing  season. 


CLIMATOLOGY   AND    SOILS.  161 

The  following*  is  Hilgard's  description  of  the  famous  buckshot  soil  of 
Louisiana,  which  is  justly  claimed  to  he  the  finest  type  of  cotton  soil  in 
this  country : 

The  buckshot  soil,  in  its  store  of  plant  food  of  all  kinds,  stands  preeminent  above 
all  of  the  rest  of  the  soils  and  well  deserves  its  reputation  of  being  the  most  pro- 
ductive and  tillable  soil  iu  the  great  bottom.  Unlike  many  other  clay  soils,  it  may 
be  tilled  at  any  time  when  the  plow  can  be  propelled  through  it,  because  on  drying 
it  crumbles  into  a  loose  mass  of  better  tilth  than  many  elaborately  tilled  upland 
soils.  It  is  so  deep  that  the  deepest  tillage,  even  by  a  steam  plow,  would  not  reach 
beyond  the  true  soil  material.  Its  high  absorptive  power  secures  crops  against 
injury  from  drought.  Two  bales  of  lint  per  acre  can  be  produced  on  these  soils  with 
fair  cultivation  and  good  seasons. 

In  South  Carolina  the  ridge  lands  and  the  soils  of  the  lied  Hill  forma- 
tion, covering  an  extensive  area  in  the  central  and  eastern  portions 
of  the  State,  are  types  of  the  most  productive  and  most  certain 
cotton  soils,  under  good  treatment,  of  any  in  the  State.  These  soils, 
which  may  be  considered  a  type  of  the  finest  cotton  soils  of  that 
locality,  contain  from  25  to  30  per  cent  of  clay  and  40  per  cent  of  silt. 
In  the  North  this  would  make  a  very  fair  quality  of  wheat  land.  These 
soils  maintain  on  an  average  during  the  growing  season  about  10  or  12 
per  cent  of  moisture  for  the  cotton  crop. 

The  Sea  Island  cotton  is  best  adapted  to  a  very  different  kind  of  soil. 
The  best  soils  for  this  variety  are  light,  fine-grained,  sandy  soils,  con- 
taining from  1  to  8  per  cent  of  clay,  from  1  to  0  per  cent  of  silt,  and 
from  75  to  90  per  cent  of  fine  sand.  Soils  of  this  character  from  James 
Island  maintained  during  two  growing  seasons  about  5  per  cent  of 
moisture  and  are  very  different  from  the  best  type  of  soils  adapted  to 
the  upland  cotton. 

The  foregoing  is  a  concise  statement  of  the  present  views  of  the 
relation  of  climatic  conditions  and  of  soils  to  cotton  production  rather 
than  an  attempt  to  describe  the  individual  soil  formations.  In  the  cot- 
ton report  of  the  Tenth  Census  the  principal  soil  formations  of  the 
cotton-producing  States  are  very  elaborately  described,  and  form  the 
basis  for  very  valuable  investigations.1 

It  is  believed  that  this  discussion  of  the  principles  will  be  of  more 
value  than  a  description  of  Jlie  agricultural  features  of  the  different 
soils  of  the  cotton  belt,  as  it  is  more  suggestive  both  to  the  practical 
farmer  in  his  study  of  the  best  methods  of  dealing  with  his  land  and 
to  the  investigator  who  wishes  to  continue  the  study  of  the  important 
problem  presented  in  the  relation  of  climate  and  soils  to  cotton 
production. 

Comparatively  little  work  has  been  done  in  this  country  upon  the 
physical  properties  of  the  soils  of  the  cotton  belt.  Quite  a  number  of 
mechanical  analyses  of  soils  were  made  by  Hilgard's  method  for  the 
report  on  cotton  for  the  Tenth  Census,  but  there  is  little  attempt  at 
an  interpretation  of  these  results,  and  in  all  that  mass  of  literature 


1  See  also  chapter  on  culture,  p.  225. 

1993— No.  33 11 


162 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


very  little  attention  lias  been  given  to  the  physical  properties  of  the 
soils.  Very  little  work  has  been  done  since  then  upon  the  study  of 
the  structure  or  physical  properties  of  the  soils  of  the  cotton  belt. 

TYPICAL    SOILS    OP   THE    COTTON    BELT. 

As  already  noted,  chemical  examination  of  the  soils  of  the  cotton 
region  has  been  more  complete  than  physical  studies.  The  following 
tables,  compiled  from  Ililgard's  report  in  the  Tenth  Census,  referred  to 
above,  give  the  chemical  analyses  of  representative  samples  of  subsoil 
from  the  typical  soil  areas  in  all  the  States  in  which  cotton  is  exten- 
sively grown.  For  a  complete  compilation  of  analyses  the  reader  is 
referred  to  the  original  report. 

Classification  of  the  typical  soil  areas  of  the  cotton  States. 
[The  numbers  refer  to  samples  in  the  accompanying  tables  of  analyses.] 


Metamorphic  region : 
Red  lands. 
Gray  lands. 


Coal  Measures  region. 
Tennessee  Valley  region : 

The  barrens. 

The  red  valley  lands. 


ALABAMA. 

Middle  division. 

Coosa  Valley  region : 
Flatwoods. 

Brown-loam  and  red-clay  lands. 
Gray  cherty  lands. 

NortJi  ern  divi sio  n . 

Tennessee  Valley  region — Continued. 
Sandy  land  of  the  Little  Mountain 
range. 


Oak  and  pine  uplands  region: 

Oak  and  hickory  uplands,  with  short- 
leaf  pine. 
Gravelly   hills,    with   long-leaf  pine 

(3,  9,  20). 
Oak  and  hickory  uplands,  with  long- 
leaf  pine  (140,  94,  92). 
Central  or  upper  prairie  region  : 

Black  prairies  or  canebrake  (30,  16). 


So ii them  division. 

Central  or  upper  prairie  region — Cont'd. 

Hill  prairies  (13). 

Blue-marl  lands. 
Post- oak  flatwoods  region  (25,  17). 
Lime     hills     or     lower    prairie     region 

(139,  90). 
Long-leaf  pine  region  (88). 
Alluvial  region. 


284, 
441, 


Alluvial  lands: 

Mississippi  and  St.  Francis  alluvial 

region  (219). 
Arkansas    River    bottom    (275, 

390,  427,  416). 
White   River    lands    (246,    384, 

233).  ' 
Saline  River  lands  (337). 
Red  River  bottom  lands  (359). 
Poplar    ridge  lands    east  of   White 

River  (222,  447,  434). 
Gray-silt  prairies    of   eastern   Arkansas 

(323,  434,  468). 
Yellow  loam  and  sandy  pine-hills  region : 
Gray  sandy  (350). 


ARKANSAS. 

Black  prairie  of  the  Southwest  (328). 
Red-loam  region,  rocky,  and  hill  lands : 
Gray  and  red  loam  timbered  lands 

(314,  393,  317,  302). 
Western  and  central  red-loam  prairie 

region  (353). 
Northwestern  red  prairie  (254). 
Metamorphic  soils  (402). 
Northern  barrens  and  hills  region : 

Siliceous  lands  of  chert,  sandstone, 

and  limestone  (287,  308,  293,  242). 
Barrens  and  cherty  magnesian  lime- 
stone lands  (266,  257,250). 


CLIMATOLOGY    AND    SOILS. 


163 


GEORGIA. 

Northwest  Georgia : 

Gray  sandy  lauds  of  the  metamorphic 
border. 

Flatwoods. 

Red-clay  lands. 

Gray  siliceous  soils  of  the  ridges. 

Brown  and  red  loams  (517). 

Yellow-clay  lands. 

Sandy  table  or  mountain  lands. 

Alluvial  lands. 
Metamorphic    or    mineral   region   (Blue 
Ridge) : 

Gray  Bandy  lands  (212,  82). 

Red  lands. 

Gray  granitic  lands  (288). 


Metamorphic    or    mineral   region   (Blue 
Ridge) — Continued. 

Flatwoods. 
Central  cotton  belt : 

Sand  and  pine  hills  or  border  region. 

Oak,  hickory,  and  pine  uplands  (165, 
182). 

Red-clay  hills. 
Long-leaf  pine  and  wire-grass  region: 

Lime-siuk  or  clay  lands  (500). 

Sandy  pine  barrens  (509). 

Pine  and  palmetto  flats. 
Coast  region : 

Savanna  lands. 

Live-oak  and  coast  lands  (511). 


LOUISIANA. 


Alluvial  region : 

Alluvial  region  north  of  Red  River 
(238). 

Red  River  bottom  region  (39). 

Alluvial  region  south  of  Red  River. 

Tidewater  region. 

Marsh  lands. 
Blutf  region. 
Attakapas  prairie  region : 

Black  calcareous  prairie  (230). 

Brown-loam  prairie. 

Gray  silt,  or  pine  prairies  (195). 


Long-leaf  pine  region : 

Pine  llats. 

Pine  hills  (134). 

Anacoco  prairie. 
Central  prairie  region. 
Oak-upland  region : 

Red  lands  (231, 184). 

Brown  loam. 

Pale  loam  (232). 

Pine  flats.      • 


The  northeastern  prairie  region: 

Rotten  limestoue  prairie  region — 

Black  prairie  (172,  125). 

Black-jack  prairie. 

Bald  prairie  (175). 

Ridge  soils  (141). 

Hickory  hummocks  (273). 

Sandy  upland  ridges. 

Bottom  soils  (177). 
The  Pontotoc  ridge. 
The  flatwoods  region: 

Post-oak  flatwoods  (230). 
White-oak  flatwoods  (147). 
Yellow-loam  or  oak  upland  region: 
Flatwood  hills  (119). 
Short-leaf  pine  and  oak  uplands  ( 142 ) . 
Red  lands  (246). 
Sandy  oak  uplands  (228), 
Brown-loam  table  lands  (216). 
Bottom  soils  of  the  yellow-loam  re- 
gion (156). 


MISSISSIPPI. 

The  alluvial  region  of  the  Mississippi : 
Yazoo  basin. 
Dogwood  ridge  (396). 
Sunflower  basin  (376). 
Deer  Creek  region  (390). 
The  cane-hills  region : 

Bottom  or  valley  soils  of  the  region 

(117). 
Oak  uplands  belt  (237,  116). 
Central  prairie  region : 

Soils  of  the  central  prairie  region — 
Black  prairie  soils  (188,210,44,40). 
Gypseous  and  hog- wallow  prairie 
soils  (242,  38). 
Sandy  ridge  lands. 
Marls  of  the  central  prairie  region. 
Long-leaf  pine  region : 

Long-leaf  pine  hills   (205,  292,  361, 

181). 
Pine-flats  region. 
Coast  marshes  (214,  88,  90). 


NORTH    CAROLINA. 

Seaboard  region  (21,  25).  I  Long-leaf  pine  region — Continued. 

Long-leaf  pine  region:  Pine  flats  (11). 

Sandy  pine  barrens.  i  Oak  upland  region  (2). 

Level  and  rolling  upland  pine  woods  I  Transmontane  region. 
(13, 17,  37). 


164 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


Coast  region. 
Lower  pi7io  belt. 
Upper  pine  belt. 
Red  bills. 

Mississippi  bottom. 
Upland  of  west  Tennessee: 

Bluff  region  (16,17). 

Brown,  loam  table-lands  (235). 
Western  valley  of  Tennessee  River. 


SOUTH   CAROLINA. 

Sand  bills 


Metamorphic  regoin. 
Piedmont  region. 


TENNESSEE. 

Highland  rim. 
Central  basin: 

Central  limestone  soils  (2,  8). 

Orthis  limestone  binds  (12, 14). 

Mulatto  lands  (10). 


TEXAS. 


The  timbered  upland: 

Short-leaf  pine  (1). 

The  red  hills  (4,  6). 

Oak  and  hickory  uplands  (3). 

Prairies  of  the  timbered  region — 
Sandy  prairies  (7). 
Brown-loam  prairies  (34). 

Long-leaf  pine  region. 

The  cross  timbers  (upper  and  lower). 

Southern  coast  prairies. 

East  of  the  Brazos  (9,  10). 

West  of  the  Brazos  (11). 

Southwest  prairie  and  sandy  deserts. 
Central  black  prairie  region  : 

Hog-wallow. 

Black  sandy  prairies  (12). 


Central  black  prairie  region — Cont'd. 

Black  waxy  prairies  (15, 14). 
Northwestern  red-loam  region  (16). 
Western  and  northwestern  region : 

Gypsum  region. 

Llano  estacado  or  staked  plain. 

Mountainous  region  of  west  Texas. 
Alluvial  or  river  lands : 

Red  River  lands  (40). 

Sabine  and  Trinity  river  lands. 

Brazos  River  lands  ("sugar  bowl") 
(19). 

Colorado,  San  Saba,  Guadalupe,  San 
Antonio,  Neuces,  and  Rio  Grande 
river  lands. 


Analyses  of  typical  soils  of  the  cotton  States. 


No. 


140 
94 
92 


139 
90 


Kind  of  soil. 


ALABAMA. 

Oak  and  pine  uplands. 

Upland  pine-woods  soil  . . . 

Alabama  River  hummock 
soil. 

Warrior  River  hummock 
soil. 

Lime-bills  soil 

Sandy  upland  soil  (cult.).. 

Alabama  River  second- 
bottom  soil. 

Central  prairie  region. 


Black  prairie  soil 

do 

Upland  sandy  loam  soil . 


Locality. 


Prattville 

Montgomery . 

Tuscaloosa  . . 


~ 

0Q 

■■> 

cS 

A 

1* 

s> 

P.0 

A 

3  e 

2-m 

<*  c8 

:_■ 

R 

In. 

8 

8| 
1 

Wilcox  County  .. 
Barbour  County  . 
Wilcox  County . . 


Livingston 

Uniou  Springs. 
do 


Post-oak  flatwoods  region. 


Post-oak  flatwood  soil. 
Post-oak  prairie  soil. . . 


Lime-hill  region. 

Black  shell  prairie  soil 
Upland  brown-loam  soil. . 
Upland  pine- woods  soil 


Livingston 10-48 

Union  Springs 12 


Washington  County  . 

GosDort 

Andalusia 


Per 
cent. 
1.39 

6.04 


1.13 
1.91 
3.27 


17.  92 

10.43 

1.88 


10.05 
11.98 


1.75 
3.09 
1.58 


Per 

cent. 
0.00 
4.84 


Per 

cent. 
0.74 
5.36 


5. 18     4.  40 


Per 

cent. 

0.04 

.34 

.25 


7.77 
1.39 
2.29 


12.42 
11.49 
1.26 


10.20 
6.02 


5.16 
3.40 
3.02 


5.55  I 
.60  I. 
1.78 


6.94 

7.86 


6.54 
6.98 


5.42 

2 

1.14 


.44 
.29 
.21 


.55 
.14 

.17 


Per 

cent. 

0.06 

.14 

.27 

.23 
.03 
.20 


Per 
cent. 
0.07 
.14 

.47 

.18 
.01 
.22 


1.96 
.98 
.08 


.20 
.37 


.  37     29. 20 
.12  |      .10 

.11  I      .09 


CLIMATOLOGY   AND    SOILS. 


165 


Analyses  of  typical  soils  of  the  cotton  States — Continued. 


Kind  of  soil. 


ARKANSAS. 

Alluvial  lands. 
Black  bottom 


Arkansas  bottom  waste.. . 

Sandy  loam 

Arkansas  bottom 

Stiff  chocolate-colored  soil 
Arkansas    River    bottom 
cotton  soil. 

Oil  trough  bottom  soil 

Bottom  soil 

Sandy  loam 

Cache  River  bott  om 

Second  bottom  soil 

Stiff  Red  River  bottom. .. 

Sandy  soil ■ 

Hill  iand 

Little  Prairie  soil 


Locality. 


££ 


5;i 
—  -  = 

P 


Gray  silt  prairies  of  eastern 
Arkansas. 


323  Soil  of  Grand  Prairie. 
434  i  Soil  of  Little  Prairie  . 
408  |  Gray  silt  prairie 


Yelloiv  loam  and  sandy  pine 
hills  region. 


350     Pine  hills  soil. 

328  j  Black  calcareous  prairies . 


Red-loam  region,  rocky  and 
hill  lands. 

Sandy  soil 

Brownish-gray  soil 

Gray  sandy  soil 

Red  ferruginous  soil 

Red  sumac  prairie 

Prairie  soil 

Granite  soil 

Northern  barrens  and  hills 
region. 

Sandy  soil 

Brush  Creek  barrens 

Brownish-colored  soils 

do 

Barrens  soil 

Upland  siliceous  soil 

GEORGIA. 

Northivest  Georgia. 
Dark  mulatto  soil 


Metamorphic  region. 


Gray  sandy  soil . 

82     Sandy  soil 

288     Mulatto  soil 


Central  cotton  belt. 


Open  pine  woods. 
Hummock  soil ... 
Red  hills  soil 


Crowleys    Ridges, 
Greene  County. 

Van  Buren 

do 

Perry  County 

Jefferson  County 

Arkansas  County 


Independence  County . 

Batesville 

Phillips  County 

Jackson  County  ... 

Saline  County 

Miller  County 

Crowleys  Ridge 

do 

Moreau 


Prairie  County 

Lee  County - 

Arkansas  County . 


Union  County 

Hempstead  County . 


Pulaski  County. . . 

Tell  County 

Pope  County 

White  County 

Sebastian  County. 

Marion  County 

Pulaski  County . . 


Benton  County.. 
Madison  County. 
Newton  County  . 

Izard  County 

Pulton  County. . . 
Marion  County . . 


Cedartown. 


Clarksville 

Douglas  County 
Jonesboro 


Thomasville 6       1.04 

Decatur  County 2.37 

Stewart  County 6       2.71 

a  Oxid  of  manganese  and  iron. 


In, 


10 


Per 

cent. 


80.60 
89.  90 
93.52 
71.17 
81.24 

83.73 
91.59 

90.40 

91.63 

90 

79.42 

91.87 

91.79 

88.40 


92.33 

88.40 
86.46 


92.12 
35.14 


90.91 
90.84 
90.31 
88.85 
83.  24 
88.96 
87.34 


92.  20 
91.85 
90.85 
85.08 
77.35 
90.80 


1.83 
2.57 
3.44 


Per 

cent. 
0.40 


3.09 

.61 

10.  34 

6.09 

5.29 

2.81 
3.39 
2.19 


1.52 
4.89 
4.91 


2.94 
5.24 


3.46 
3.19 
3.09 
4.38 
4.51 


Per 

cent. 
1.01 


2.36 
1.54 
7 
4.64 

3.31 
2.12 
2.71 
2.07 
5.27 
4.72 
1  96 
2.29 
2.79 


2.02 
2.79 
3.97 


1.87 
2.54 


2.27 
2.94 
3.05 
2.99 
6.  94 


3.34  'a2.86 
4.  64     4.  39 


1.19 
2.33 
3.14 
4.79 
7.24 
3.34 


2.56 
2.16 
2.46 
4.49 
5.36 
a2.67 


2.60 
3.18 
3.05 


1.58 

1.09 

10.60 


.85 
2.66 

2.17 


.93 
1.13 

4.05 


Per 

cent. 
0.13 

.58 
.31 
.21 
1.01 
.71 

.44 
.21 
.30 
.30 
.21 
.53 
.21 
.19 
.29 


.12 
.16 
.24 


.03 
.07 
.13 


Per 

cent. 
0.08 

.21 
.16 
.18 
.46 
.22 

.22 
.21 
.26 
.19 
.18 
.16 
.  12 
.19 
.13 


.  Id 
.13 

.\Ji 

.12 

.05 

.06 

.04 

.09 

28. 13 

.06 

.02 

.21 

.02 

.18 

.06 

.10 

.05 

.21 

.07 

.14 

.17 

.14 

.12 

.04 

.03 

.19 

.07 

.08 

.11 

.19 

.14 

.17 

.24 

.12 

.11 

.04 

.29 

.04 

.02 

.30 

.13 

.23 

.08 

.01 

.05 

.24 

.05 

.07 

.22 

166 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


Analyses  of  typical  soil*  of  the  cotton  States — Continued. 


Kind  of  soil. 


Georgia— continued. 

Long-leaf  pine  and  wir 
grass  region. 

Sandy  soil 

Sandy  jiino  woods 

Coast  region. 
Live-oak  soil 

LOUISIANA. 

Alluvial  region. 


Reddish  loam 

Front-lands  subsoil 


Attakapas prairie  region . 


Black  prairie  soil. 
Pine  prairie  soil. . 


Long-leaf  pine  region. 
Pine-kills  subsoil 


Oak  uplands. 


Red -clay  soil 

Red  upland  subsoil. 
Yellow  sandy  soil . . 


MISSISSI1T1. 


Northeastern  prairie  region. 


172     Prairie  soil. 

125     Black    prairie,   on  which 

cotton  rusts  badly. 
175  I  Bald  prairii 


Heavy  clay  soil 

Dark-loam  hummock  soil. 
Black  hummock 


Flatwoods  region. 

Heavy  clay  soil 

White-oak  flatwoods  . 


Yellow -loam  region  or  oak 
uplands. 

Flatwoods  hills 

Oak  upland  soil 

Red-hill  soil 

228  I  Sandy  oak  uplands 

2'6  j  Brown-loam  table       ds.. 
156  i  Big  black  hummo      soil-. 

396     Buckshot  soil 

376     Light  front-lands  soil 

390     Stiff  buckshot  soil 


Cane  hills. 

237     Loess 

117     White  hummock  soil . 
116     Upland  loess 


Central  prairie  region. 

Black  prairie  loam  soil . . 

Black  prairie  soil 

Upland  prairie  soil 

Bald  prairie  soil 

Hog- wallow  prairie  soil . 
Hog-wallow  upland  soil. 


Locality. 


Screven  County 
Telfair  County 

Liberty  County 


Bed  River  bottom 
Girards 


New  Iberia 

Serpent  Bayou. 


Vernon  County 


Vienna 

Mansfield 

Bastrop  hills 


Monroe  County. 
Buena  Vista 


Booneville 

Kemper  County 
Tippah  County . 
Lee  County 


Pontotoc  County 

Chickasaw  County  . . . 


Lafayette  County. . . 

Greensboro 

Kosciusko 

Lafayette  County. . . 

Benton  County 

Sumner  County 

Coahoma  County  ... 

Indian  Bayou. . . 

Issaquena  County. . 


\f.  © 


12 
10-20 


10 

5-12 

12 


Claiborne  County 

Bayou  Pierre 

Claiborne  County. 


Rankin  County. 
Smith  County  . . 
Clarke  County.. 
do 


Tallahalla  Creek 
Clarke  County — 


8-10 

..... 


i  er 
cent. 
0.87 
1.10 


9.90 
2.03 


16.08 
6.58 
5.75 


3.60 
13.  22 
5.96 
3.80 


1.63 
2.32 


1.64 


3.64 
10.90 

4.04 
20.  70 


2.56 
6.45 


4.46 


16.10 
7.83 


Per 

cent. 
1.  10 
2.26 


1.41 
G.37 


4.83 
1.71 


11.71 
4.99 
4.87 


Per      Per 

cent.  ;  cent. 

0.67  |  0.32 

.97       .09 


.29 


1.C9 
4.10 


2.  78 
1.11 


3.21 


15.  93 

8.62 
3.55 


14,22 


11.16 

14.37 
16.  07 
3.43 
3.02 


10.  30 
1.77 


1.27 
1.87 

17.  50 
2.65 
6.28 
3.47 
4.  16 
2.57 

10.54 


1.39 
2.51 


5.51 

7.  65 
7.09 
3.42 
1.59 


5.  90 
3.06 


1.63 
1.84 
10.50 
2.53 
4.80 
2.87 
2.80 
1.85 
5.82 


3.27 

1 

2.95 


7.  25     4.  77 

10.36 

17. 83  I  7.  34 

7.45  I  4.09 
10.  C6     4. 12 

6.37  I  3.95 


.15 
.24 
.73 
.12 
.55 
.17 
.6] 
.23 
1.10 


.51 
.13 
.36 


.57 
.69 

.59 
.53 
.36 


Per 
cent. 
o.  13 

.04 


CLIMATOLOGY   AND    SOILS. 


167 


Analyses  of  typical  soils  of  the  cotton  States — Continued. 


No. 

Kind  of  soil. 

Locality. 

03 
O 

'S 

o 

3 

2 
73 

"3 

3 

< 

a 

O 

u 

=H 

o 

V, 
o 

O 

Ph 

'o 
03 
o 

°C 
o 

» 

CD 
O 
Jl 

Ph 

s 
3 

205 

Mississippi — continued. 
Long-leaf  pine  region. 

Simpson  County 

Lawrence  County 

In. 
6 

Per 
cent. 

2.02 

Per 
cent. 

1.48 

Per 

cent. 

1.26 

3.65 

2.70 

.61 

.46 

.52 

.52 

40 
.30 

4.79 

1.58 

.70 

.75 

2.82 

.60 
.74 

1.25 

1.56 

11.70 

3.66 
4.69 

3.86 

6.84 
4.77 
5.29 
3.69 
9.58 

1.03 

.61 

1.61 

Per 
cent. 

0.07 
.27 
.25 
.11 
.06 
.05 

.08 

.16 
.05 

.20 
.14 
.13 
.09 

.12 

.13 

.08 

.12 
.14 

.21 

.40 
.43 
.70 

.51 
.25 
.33 
.58 
.75 

.05 
.11 
.11 

Per 

cent. 

0.07 

.10 

.10 
.01 
.02 
.10 

.11 

.30 
.06 

.14 
.12 

.02 
.06 

.05 

.21 

.04 

.10 
.09 

.13 

.06 
.32 
.24 

.31 

.06 
.34 
.32 
.36 

.09 
.17 
.19 

Per 
cent. 
0.06 

292 

Red  loam  subsoil 

White  hummock  soil 

Sandy  soil 

Sandy   sea  Island   cotton 

soil. 
Sandy  Sea  Island  cotton 

subsoil. 

NOKTH  CAROLINA. 

Seaboard  region. 

Dark  mucky  soil 

Cypress  and  green  swamp. 

Long-leaf  pine  region. 

Gray  sandy  soil 

Gray  sandy  loam 

8-18       6.69 

5.11 
6  30 

.06 

.12 

18) 
214 

88 

90 

21 
25 

6        1    7-1 

.82 
.85 
.46 

.32 

6. 
3.33 

7.40 
2.90 
1.48 
1.56 

3.80 

2.85 

1.85 

3.98 
3.67 

26.54 

5.03 
3.10 
7.73 

10.30 
7.77 
7.12 
6.98 

17.30 

.28 

.91 

1.47 

.06 

Jackson  County 

do 

Mattamnskeet  Lake 

12 
12 

12-20 

2.45 

.03 
3.60 

4.02 
1.58 
3.67 
2.95 

4.72 

2.06 

1.48 

3.  OC 
2.85 

5.S7 

«86. 98 
«7G.  50 

«77   70 

.02 
.10 

.12 

.12 
.10 

13 

11 

IS 

Weldon 

.12 

37 
11 

12 

5-20 

12 
12 
12 

5-20 

.45 

do 

Oak  uplands. 

.05 

2 
6 

.07 

SOUTH  CAROLINA. 
The  coast  region. 

.04 

R 

The  upper  pine  belt. 

Savannah  Itiyer 

Oran  geburg  County . . . 
do 

.11 

Red-hills  formation. 

.06 

2 

.08 

11 

Mctamorphie  region. 

Spartanburg 

Gills  Station 

.03 

16 

TENNESSEE. 

Upland  of  vest  Tennessee. 

.24 

17 

9^ 

Murfreesboro 

Maury  County 

Hermitage 

Dell  Meade  (Nashville) 

12 
10-20 

7  15 

3.97 
.14 

«, 

Central  basin. 

.12 

8 
12 
14 
10 

.  doa^:::::::::::::::::: 

Poplar  land  soil 

do 

7-15   «82.48 
11-23    a81.87 
10-22   «84>  03 

8  20    n-riS  96 

.14 

.55 

.47 

8.38 

1 

TEXAS. 

Timbered  uplands. 

Sandy  soil 

Sandy  upland  soil 

Dark  loamy  soil 

•     12 
24 
8 

.98 
3.36 
1.01 

.27 

3 
4 

Mineola 

Palestine 

.03 
.15 

a  Insoluble  matter  and  soluble  silica. 


168 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


Analyses  of  typical  soils  of  the  cotton  States — Continued. 


No. 


16 


Kind  of  soil. 


TEXAS — continued. 

Timbered  uplands — Cont'd, 

Red  glauconitic  soil 

Sandy  prairie  soil 

do 

Black  waxy  prairie  soil  . . 
Black  prairie  upland  soil. 
Dark  sandy  prairie  soil  . . 

Central  black  prairie  region, 

Black  sandy  prairie  soil . . 
Black  waxy  prairie  soil  . . 
Black  waxy  soil 

Northwestern  red-loam  re- 
gion. 

Bed-loam  soil 

Alluvial  or  river  lands. 

Dark-loam  second-bottom 
soil. 

Brazos  Valley  soil 

Colorado  Valley  soil 


Locality. 


Leo  County 

Tehuacana  

Pierce's  Junction. 

Victoria 

Chapel  Hill 

Corsicana 

Ennis 

Cleburne 

McKinney 

Jacksboro 

Red  River , 

Granbury  

Austin 


cS 

'3 

a 

k  <d 

o 

ca 

0 

a 

EH 

O 

00 

a 

A 

P< 

o 

A 

O 

03 

* 

c 

0 

A 

Per 

Per 

Per 

Per 

Per  | 

In. 

cent. 

cent. 

cent. 

cent. 

cent. 

12 

13.89 

5.30 

9.33 

0.72 

0.10 

12 

1.42 

.ill 

1.43 

.14 

.36 

8 

3.61 

6.08 

2.40 

.29 

.16 

12 

22.  42 

1.25 

11.28 

.43 

.09 

12 

12.18 

4.16 

2.27 

.24 

.11 

10 

5.18 

2.39 

1.64 

.12 

.23 

10 

12 

3.69 
5.56 

4 
5.75 

1.77 
5.35 

.29 
.37 

.05 

.18 

12 

17.24 

11.07 

4.22 

.62 

.15 

10 

8.65 

5.08 

5.  05 

.43 

.10 

12 

9.  10 

3.25 

3.30 

.40 

.16 

12 
10 

2.15 
10.36 

2.51 
3.29 

2.08 
2.93 

.30 
.58 

.09 
.21 

Per 

cent. 
0.26 
.19 
.65 
1.05 
.95 
.32 


.59 

9.78 
7.48 


.41 
7.79 


' 


THE  MANURING  OF  COTTON. 

By  H.  C.  White,  Ph.  D., 

President  and  Professor  of  Chemistry  of  the  Georgia  State  College  of  Agriculture  and 
Mechanic  Arts,  and  Vice-Director  and  Chemist  of  the  Georgia  Experiment  Station. 

HISTORICAL. 

In  the  early  history  of  cotton  culture  in  the  United  States  the  great 
bulk  of  the  crop  was  made  with  practically  no  artificial  manuring. 
The  natural  fertility  of  the  soil  was  depended  upon  to  furnish  the  plant 
food  needed  by  the  crop.  Such  attempts  as  were  made  to  increase  the 
natural  productiveness  of  the  soil  were  mainly  in  the  direction  of  im- 
proved mechanical  tillage.  Even  such  attempts  were7  however,  limited 
in  scope  and  imperfect  in  character.  The  large  area  of  virgin  land  in 
the  cotton-growing  States,  its  cheapness,  and  the  peculiar  character 
of  the  labor  employed  in  cotton  culture  made  it  apparently  (and  proba- 
bly actually)  more  profitable  to  cultivate  a  given  area  for  a  few  years 
only  and,  when  it  was  "  worn  out,"  to  abandon  it  and  bring  fresh  lauds 
into  cultivation.  The  cheapness  of  slave  labor,  the  peculiar  adapta- 
bility of  the  negro  slave  to  the  climatic  conditions  of  most  of  the  cot- 
ton-growing States,  and  the  necessity  of  providing  employment  for  the 
rapidly  increasing  numbers  of  slaves — furnishing  a  labor  which,  while 
muscular,  was  relatively  unintelligent — conspired  to  maintain  a  system 
of  culture  in  which  the  necessity  for  providing  by  judicious  fertiliza- 
tion against  the  depletion  by  continuous  culture  of  a  given  body  of 
land  Avas  not  recognized,  or,  if  recognized;  the  process  was  deemed 
impracticable  or  relatively  unprofitable.  The  small  demand  made  by 
cotton  as  compared  with  other  crops  upon  the  plant  food  of  tne  soil 
was,  moreover,  well  known  as  the  result  of  experience,  and  the  best 
lands  of  Southern  plantations — those  which  were  naturally  most  fer- 
tile— were  as  a  rule  reserved  for  corn,  wheat,  and  other  supply  crops 
so  far  as  was  necessary,  and  the  residue  giveu  over  to  cotton  culture. 
Uor  the  same  reason  and  because,  moreover,  of  the  clean  culture  nec- 
essary for  cotton  with  which  excessive  growth  of  grass  and  weeds 
would  interfere,  such  home  manures,  as  stable  manure,  etc.,  as  were 
saved  upon  the  plantations  were,  when  used  at  all,  devoted  to  the  corn 
and  grain  lands  and  practically  none  applied  to  cotton.  The  quantity 
of  such  manures  made  was  in  any  event  small,  as  the  stock  and  cattle 
upon  cotton  plantations  were  as  a  rule  limited  in  numbers  to  the  bare 
needs  of  the  plantations,  and  the  mildness  of  the  climate  rendered 
unnecessary  such  careful  housing  of  farm  animals  as  would  conduce  to 

169 


170  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

the  saving  of  manure.  Cotton  seed  was  produced  in  large  quantities 
as  a  necessary  by-product  of  the  cotton  crop,  and,  at  the  time,  the  sur- 
plus not  needed  for  seeding  had  no  value  except  for  manorial  purposes 
in  the  crude  form. 

An  examination  of  the  agricultural  journals  published  in  the  cotton- 
growing  States  previous  to,  say,  1845,  shows  that  the  manurial  value 
of  stable  manure,  cotton  seed,  and  similar  materials  was  quite  as  well 
known  to  the  cotton  planter  as  to  farmers  elsewhere  at  the  time. 

Under  the  system  of  extensive  culture  found  profitable  with  an  abun- 
dance of  cheap,  fresh  lands  and  rapidly  increasing  possession  of  slave 
labor,  the  economic  question  presented  to  the  cotton  planter  was  the 
cost  of  transporting  bulky  materials  of  comparatively  small  manurial 
value  versus  that  of  clearing  new  lands  as  an  avenue  of  employment 
for  his  labor.  The  question  was  neither  ignored  nor  untested.  Numer- 
ous instances  are  recorded  of  experiments  upon  the  subject  by  leading, 
intelligent  planters.  Experience  determined  the  policy  in  favor  of  fresh 
lauds,  and  stable  manure  an^Fcotton  seed  came  to  be  regarded  as  not 
worth  the  cost  of  handling  as  fertilizers  for  the  cotton  crop.  They 
were  used  to  considerable  extent  upon  gardens  and  under  grain  crops, 
but  only  in  rare  instances  with  cotton.  Especially  was  this  true  of 
cotton  seed,  which,  in  addition  to  its  superiority  in  manurial  value  over 
stable  manure,  was  collected  in  large  quantities  at  the  gin  houses,  and, 
thus  accumulated,  was  more  cheaply  handled.  Various  methods  were 
used  in  applying  cotton  seed  as  a  manure.  Upon  small  areas  the  green 
seeds  were  sometimes  scattered  broadcast  and  plowed  under.  More  fre- 
quently they  were  applied  in  drills  or  furrows,  in  varying  quantities  and 
at  different  depths.  It  was  generally  considered  judicious  to  kill  the 
seed  before  using  for  manure,  to  prevent  aftersprouting  and  to  secure 
material  in  better  mechanical  condition  for  handling.  This  was  accom- 
plished in  various  ways.  A  common  practice  was  to  pile  the  seeds  in 
large  heaps  and  allow  them  to  staud  for  several  months  exposed  more 
or  less  to  the  weather.  The  heat  of  partial  germination  would  kill  the 
seed  and  the  mass  would  undergo  a  process  of  rotting.  The  heap  was 
cut  down  in  the  spring  and  the  rotted  material  applied  to  the  land. 
There  was,  of  course,  great  manurial  waste  in  this  process.  Frequently, 
on  cutting  down  such  heaps,  the  odor  of  escaping  ammonia  was  so 
strongly  developed  as  to  be  noticeable  at  considerable  distances  from 
the  heap. 

While  the  cotton  crop  of  itself  received  practically  no  artificial  fer- 
tilization at  all,  the  lands  designed  for  grain  and  supply  crops  were 
manured  and  otherwise  treated  in  much  the  same  manner  as  obtained 
for  similar  crops  elsewhere,  so  far  as  the  prevailing  conditions  per- 
mitted. The  manurial  value  of  soiling  crops  (especially  clover  and 
peas),  of  fallowing,  and  of  rotation  was  well  understood,  and  such 
methods  of  soil  improvement  were  in  many  instances  practiced.  As 
population  increased  and  fresh  lands  became  less  abundant,  higher  in 


THE    MANURING   OF    COTTON.  171 

price,  and  more  difficult  to  acquire,  cotton,  to  some  extent,  was  given  a 
place  in  tlie  rotation  of  crops,  and  thus  benefited  by  the  fertilization 
applied  to  previous  crops.  In  the  main,  however,  the  great  bulk  of  the 
cotton  crop  previous  to  1860  may  be  said  to  have  been  grown  without 
artificial  fertilization  and  mainly  upon  virgin  sods. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  previous  to  the  civil  war,  the  best  lands  of 
the  plantations  were  devoted  to  food  crops,  and  they  were  manured 
and  tilled  as  judiciously  as  the  conditions  permitted  and  the  then  state 
of  knowledge  of  scientific  agriculture  indicated.  The  profit  in  the  slave 
depended  upon  the  finding  of  a  market  for  his  labor,  and  the  best 
market  afforded  was  an  extension  of  the  area  of  cultivatable  lands 
devoted,  in  their  fresh  state,  to  the  production  of  a  crop  readily  con- 
vertible into  money,  peculiarly  suited  (as  the  slave  himself)  to  the 
climate,  and  in  the  cultivation  of  which  muscular  labor  should  count 
for  much  and  intelligence  and  science  for  but  little.  Under  the  cir- 
cumstances, there  was  no  profit  discernible  in  the  artificial  fertilization 
of  a  cotton  plantation  or  even  in  attempted  preservation  of  its  original 
fertility,  and  as  the  cotton  planter  naturally  planted  for  present  gain, 
with  but  small  consideration  for  the  prosperity  of  posterity,  the  cotton 
crop  of  the  United  States  previous  to  I860  was,  in  the  main,  made  by 
skimming  the  virgin  soil  of  the  cotton  States,  the  production  depend- 
ing upon  the  natural  fertility  of  the  land. 

In  1815  Peruvian  guano  was  first  introduced  into  the  United  States. 
In  1816  Mr.  David  Dickson,  of  Hancock  County,  Ga.,  "  saw  an  adver- 
tisement in  the  American  Farmer,  Baltimore,  of  the  wonderful  effects 
of  Peruvian  guano.  [HeJ  procured  three  sacks  and  used  it,  and  finding 
it  paid  used  it  in  increasing  quantities  till  1855  or  1856,  and  then  went 
into  it  fully."  This  was  probably  the  first  instance  of  the  use  of  a  con- 
centrated fertilizer  in  the  cotton-growing  States  upon  crops  of  any 
kind,  and  certainly  the  first  instance  of  such  use  with  cotton.  Mr. 
Dickson's  first  experiments  with  Peruvian  guano  were  upon  a  small 
and  judicious  scale.  He  applied  it  to  cotton  only  upon  his  best  cotton 
lands  in  comparatively  small  quantities,  and  always  in  the  drill. 
When  he  "  went  into  it  fully'''  the  amount  he  used  was  rarely  as  much 
as  200  pounds  per  acre.  The  successful  experience  of  Mr.  Dickson  and 
other  prominent  planters,  who  speedily  followed  his  example,  led  to 
very  numerous  experiments  with  Peruvian  guano  as  a  fertilizer  for  cot- 
ton. The  history  of  this  famous  stimulant  manure  as  a  cotton  fertilizer 
in  the  Southern  States  was  similar  to  that  which  it  had  experienced  in 
connection  with  other  crops  elsewhere.  For  a  year  or  two  the  results 
of  its  use  were  not  only  satisfactory  but  surprising.  Subsequently  the 
rapid  and  excessive  growth  of  weeds,  with  all  the  attendant  dangers  in 
a  region  subject  to  severe  drought,  was  not  attended  with  a  corre- 
sponding yield  of  fruit,  and  the  reputation  of  the  guano  suffered  accord- 
ingly. It  was  suggested  that  the  active  stimulant  effect  of  the  manure 
might  be  overcome  by  burying  the  guano  deep  in  the  soil,  and  for  a 


172  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

while  this  plan  was  followed  quite  extensively.  It  was  not  found  sat- 
isfactory, however,  and  many  entirely  abandoned  the  use*of  Peruvian 
guano  as  unprofitable.  The  dangers  attending  the  use  of  Peruvian 
guano  as  a  fertilizer  when  applied  alone  were,  perhaps,  more  speedily 
and  more  strikingly  manifested  in  the  ease  of  cotton  than  of  most 
other  crops  with  which  it  was  used,  because  of  the  initial  poverty  of 
the  generality  of  cotton  lands,  their  deficiency  in  organic  matter,  the 
clean  culture  of  the  crop,  and  the  heat  and  droughts  of  the  region  in 
which  it  was  cultivated. 

In  18(30  came  the  civil  war  and  almost  simultaneously  the  introduc- 
tion into  commerce  on  a  large  scale  of  chemical  manures,  as  a  result  of 
the  investigations  and  teachings  of  Liebig,  the  discovery  of  phosphate 
deposits,  and  the  opening  of  the  German  potash-salts  beds.  The  results 
of  the  war,  the  abolition  of  slavery,  and  the  introduction  of  chemical 
manures  completely  revolutionized  the  methods  of  cotton  culture  in  the 
Southern  States.  Up  to  that  date  the  principal  capital  of  the  cotton 
planter  had  been  the  controllable  labor  of  his  numerous  slaves,  the 
field  of  its  employment — cheap  virgin  lands — requiring  scarcely  any 
other  capital  for  their  profitable  cultivation.  Now  his  chief  and  almost 
sole  possession  was  an  extensive  domain  of  worn-out  and  abandoned 
land,  robbed  of  its  original  fertility  by  the  butchery  of  previous  culti- 
vation and  offering  scant  promise  of  productiveness  at  the  hands  of  the 
recently  emancipated,  unskilled,  and  irresponsible  freedman.  Under 
these  circumstances  the  chemical  manure,  furnishing  plant  food  in  a  con- 
centrated form  at  comparatively  small  cost,  easy  of  application,  guaran- 
teeing a  fairly  good  crop  from  even  the  poorest  and  most  exhausted 
soil  with  a  minimum  expenditure  of  labor  in  cultivation,  and  requiring 
no  special  skill  in  its  manipulation,  was  hailed  as  an  agent  admirably 
and  peculiarly  suited  to  the  necessities  and  the  new  conditions  of  the 
cotton  planter.  The  obligation  no  longer  rested  upon  thr  planter  to 
devote  his  chief  attention  and  his  best  lands  to  the  production  of  food 
crops  for  his  labor.  Cotton  was  a  crop  for  which  there  was  great 
demand  at  good  prices  and  immediate  cash  payments.  An  enormous 
impetus  was,  in  consequence,  given  to  cotton  culture  in  the  former 
slave  States.  Concentrated  manures  made  such  culture  jjossible  and 
profitable,  and  almost  immediately  came  into  well-nigh  universal  use. 
Since  the  close  of  the  civil  war  to  the  present  time  practically  all  the 
cotton  cultivated  in  the  United  States,  with  the  exception  of  compara- 
tively small  quantities  grown  upon  the  alluvial  soils  of  great  river  bot- 
toms and  occasional  areas  of  newly  cleared  land,  has  been  fertilized 
with  concentrated  manures.  Probably  upon  no  other  crop  to  which 
they  have  been  applied  have  these  manures  exercised  so  great  an  influ- 
ence as  upon  cotton.  ISot  only  were  profitable  crops  made  with  them 
upon  lands  which  without  them  it  would  not  have  paid  to  cultivate,  and 
an  immense  area  of  worn-out  land  thus  redeemed  to  culture,  but  the 
stimulant  effect  of  the  manure  so  shortened  the  period  of  growth  and 


THE   MANURING   OF    COTTON.  173 

maturity  of  the  plant  that  the  climatic  limit  of  culture  was  extended. 
Cotton  soon  came  to  be  grown  abundantly  over  large  regions  where, 
previous  to  the  introduction  of  such  manures,  killing  frosts  intervened 
before  the  maturity  and  fruitage  of  the  plant.  The  enormous  increase 
in  the  cotton  production  of  the  United  States  since  1S60  is  undoubtedly 
to  be  credited  chiefly,  if  not  exclusively,  to  the  use  of  concentrated 
manures.  Considering  the  condition  of  the  land  and  the  labor  system 
of  the  cotton  States  at  the  close  of  the  civil  war,  it  is  difficult  to  con- 
ceive how  cotton  culture  could  have  been  continued  or  sustained  but 
for  the  use  of  such  manures. 

Undoubtedly  all  these  circumstances  and  considerations  conspired 
to  invest  the  commercial  fertilizer  in  the  estimation  of  the  cotton 
planter  with  something  of  the  character  of  a  fetich,  and  this  led,  in 
turn,  to  two  natural  errors  on  his  part — (1)  to  attach  but  little  impor- 
tance to  difference  in  chemical  composition,  quality  or  character  of  the 
various  compounds  offered  in  the  markets,  and  (2)  to  rely  too  exclu- 
sively upon  the  fertilizer  for  the  production  of  his  crop.  During  the 
years  of  the  war,  from  1860  to  1865,  when  the  Southern  farmer  was  cut 
off  from  communication  with  the  rest  of  the  world,  immense  progress 
had  been  made  elsewhere  in  the  study  and  correct  understanding  of 
the  value  of  chemical  manures,  and  research  and  experiment  had  indi- 
cated approximately  tbe  proper  qualitative  and  quantitative  compo- 
sition of  such  manures  for  general  crops.  The  trade  was  not  slow  to 
offer  these  in  so  promising  a  market  as  the  cotton-growing  States. 
"Guanos"  (some  genuine  and  some  so-called),  " fertilizers,"  "complete 
manures,"  and  innumerable  compounds  under  suggestive  appellations 
which  testified  to  the  vigorous  and  picturesque  imagination  of  the 
American  tradesman  were  ready  in  waiting  at  the  restoration  of  peace 
and  were  soon  poured  in  a  rapidly  swelling  flood  upon  the  cotton  plan- 
tations of  the  South.  "Guano"  soon  came  to  be  (and  still  is)  the  pop- 
ular designation  for  all  such  manipulated  goods.  The  greater  number 
of  these  were  quite  similar  in  character,  being  mixtures  of  dissolved 
phosphate,  potash  salts,  and  nitrogenous  matters  (generally  organic). 
They  differed  quite  widely  in  quality,  however,  ranging,  in  soluble 
phosphoric  acid,  from  6  to  10  per  cent;  in  soluble  actual  potash,  from  1 
to  4  per  cent,  and  in  nitrogen  from  1  to  3  per  cent,  as  well  as  differing 
in  the  sources  of  the  materials  of  which  they  were  composed.  A  small 
quantity  of  the  soluble  phosphate  was  obtained  from  bones ;  much  the 
larger  quantity  from  phosphate  rock.  The  potash  salts  were  mainly 
the  German  kainit  and  muriate  of  potash.  Tbe  nitrogen  compounds 
used  were  very  numerous;  mineral  salts  (sulphate  of  ammonia  and 
nitrate  of  soda)  and  animal  matters  (dried  blood,  fish  scrap,  tankage, 
etc.)  all  participated  in  the  construction  of  these  so-called  "  complete 
manures."  Peruvian  and  other  true  guanos  were  offered  in  moderate 
quantities,  both  in  original  condition  and,  profiting  by  experience, 
manipulated  (with  dissolved  phosphate  to  "  Phospho-Peruvian,"  for 


174  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

instance)  to  safer  composition  for  general  use.  For  a  number  of  years 
the  choice  of  a  "guano  "was  determined  mainly  by  the  persuasive 
representations  of  the  seller  of  the  goods  or  the  personal  experience 
of  the  buyer  or  his  friends  in  their  actual  use,  and  the  relative  prices 
of  different  goods  were  fixed  more  by  the  reputation  thus  gained  for 
the  "brand"  than  by  their  relative  contents  of  actual  plant  food. 
Indeed,  even  when  competition  and  the  agreement  of  manufacturers 
and  dealers  brought  all  such  manipulated  goods  to  an  approximately 
uniform  price  the  variation  in  quality,  as  indicated  by  chemical  analy- 
sis, was  still  (piite  great  among  them  and  yet  was  practically  disre- 
garded by  the  purchaser  as  a  rule.  "  Guano  "  was  "  guano,"  and  aside 
from  a  slight  prejudice  (irrational,  no  doubt,  but  comprehensible)  in 
favor  of  the  dark-colored  and  bad-smelling  varieties  no  great  impor- 
tance was  attached  to  its  composition  or  its  variations,  provided  it 
made  cotton — which  even  the  poorest  in  quality  of  those  offered  was 
quite  competent  to  do.  To  adopt  an  oft-used  expression,  the  use  of 
"guano"  in  cotton  culture  was  the  result  of  "revolution,"  not  of  "evo- 
lution," and  it  is  small  wonder,  therefore,  that  it  was  neither  strictly 
scientific  nor  thoroughly  efficient.  To  the  cotton  planter  after  the  war, 
with  sterile  lands  and  his  labor  system  wrecked,  "guano"  was  offered 
as  the  one,  sole  chance  for  profitable  tillage  of  his  soil.  It  came  to  him 
apparently  full-fledged  and  perfected.  He  adopted  it  in  his  dire 
extremity.  It  served  him  admirably  and  speedily  assured  a  certain 
measure  of  prosperity.  It  is  not  surprising  that  he  should  have  been 
slow  to  inquire  into  the  rationale  of  its  value  or  indisposed  to  meddle 
with  its  composition.  Anything  like  scientific  experimentation  with 
chemical  manures  on  a  large  scale  in  cotton  culture  was  therefore  not 
undertaken  and  was  very  difficult  to  secure.  The  use  of  such  manures 
was  largely  empirical  and  necessarily  in  many  cases  more  or  less 
injudicious. 

The  ease  with  which  cotton  could  be  produced  by  the  use  of  such 
manures  led,  as  has  been  said,  to  an  undue  dependence  upon  them  for 
the  making  of  the  crop.  Proper  mechanical  tillage  was  neglected,  and 
the  previously  worn-out  lands  were  again  merely  skimmed — this  time 
with  the  addition  of  the  fertilizer.  As  a  consequence  it  was  not  long 
before  the  great  bulk  of  the  cotton  lands  began  to  show  the  effects  of 
a  continuous,  clean,  superficial  culture  in  a  region  subject  to  torrential, 
washing  rains  in  winter  and  hot,  baking  suns  in  summer.  Moreover, 
for  reasons  above  mentioned,- cotton  raising  had  become  the  absorbing 
agricultural  occupation  of  the  country.  The  production  of  grain  and 
other  crops,  of  live  stock  and  domestic  animals  was  neglected,  and  even 
the  necessary  food  supplies  for  the  family  and  the  labor  were  purchased 
of  the  merchant  by  the  very  large  majority  of  Southern  farmers.  Pay- 
ment for  these  supplies,  including  the  guano  that  was  used,  was  made, 
as  a  rule,  after  the  crop  was  gathered,  and  thus  began  the  unfortunate 


THE    MANUEING    OF    COTTON.  175 

credit  system,  which,  by  reason  of  its  enormous  interest  charges  in  the 
form  of  "  time  prices,"  soon  involved  the  cotton  growers  not  only  in  a 
stupendous  burden  of  debt,  but  also  in  a  fixed  and  ruinous  system  of 
agriculture  from  which  there  seemed  no  escape.  Cotton  was  the  basis 
of  credit;  no  other  farm  product  was  acceptable  in  payment  of  debts; 
upon  the  agreement  to  produce  it  credit  (at  fearful  interest  charges) 
could  alone  be  had.  For  the  farmer  without  capital  it  was  cotton  or 
starvation;  whether  lie  would  or  no,  he  was  forced  to  raise  cotton;  to 
raise  cotton  required  guano;  to  obtain  guano  a  debt  was  incurred  pay- 
able only  in  cotton.  It  is  evident  that  this  "all-cotton"  system  of 
agricultural  operations  afforded  but  little  opportunity  for  the  making 
and  use  of  farm  manures,  the  growing  of  soiling  crops,  rotation,  and 
the  other  aids  to  culture  possible  in  diversified  farming.  In  the  course 
of  time  the  ill-treated  soils  failed  to  respond  as  liberally  as  at  first  to 
the  application  of  the  concentrated  fertilizer;  the  rapidly  falling  price 
of  cotton,  consequent  upon  the  enormous  production,  decreased  the 
purchasing  ability  of  the  individual  farmer,  and  a  revulsion  in  public 
sentiment  on  the  subject  of  fertilizers  ensued  in  which  "guano" — the 
chief,  the  necessary  agent  in  the  making  of  cotton — fell  from  the  high 
estate  in  which  it  had  been  held  as  the  cotton  planter's  best  friend  and 
came  to  be  regarded  as  the  cause  of  all  his  woes.  In  the  newspapers, 
in  public  assemblies,  in  meetings  of  granges,  alliances,  and  similar 
organizations  denunciations  of  commercial  fertilizers  were  frequent  and 
vehement  and  resolutions  galore  were  unanimously  and  enthusiastic- 
ally adopted  recommending  and  pledging  a  restriction  of  their  use. 
Even  legislation  wTas  invoked  to  purge  the  body  politic  of  the  suspected 
source  of  current  ills,  and  in  the  legislatures  of  a  number  of  the  cotton 
States  measures  were  introduced  (although  none,  so  far  as  can  be  ascer- 
tained, were  actually  enacted)  designed  to  hamper  or  suppress  the 
guano  trade  or  to  make  the  legal  test  of  the  genuineness  of  a  commer- 
cial fertilizer  the  actual  profit  derived  from  its  use. 

What  declamation,  resolutions,  and  legislation  were  powerless  to 
achieve,  however,  necessity  slowly  accomplished,  a  recasting  of  the  plan 
of  farming  operations  upon  the  cotton  farms.  By  degrees  the  acreage 
of  cotton  was  relatively  decreased.  Food  supplies,  stock,  and  cattle 
were  raised.  The  cotton  planter  endeavored  to  "live  at  home"  and 
make  the  cotton  his  "surplus  crop."  Cotton,  in  many  instances,  was 
entirely  abandoned  and  replaced  by  fruit,  truck,  and  other  crops.  With 
the  diversification  of  crops  came  better  tillage,  renovating  crops,  home 
manures,  and  a  better  understanding  and  more  judicious  use  of  concen- 
trated fertilizers.  To  this  improved  condition  the  major  part  of  the 
cotton  States  have  attained  at  the  present  time.1 

In  the  meanwhile  numerous  agencies  had  been  at  work  in  the  cotton 
States  looking  to  the  study  of  the  scientific  culture  of  cotton  and  a 

^ee  also  article  on  culture  of  cotton,  p.  225. 


176  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

dissemination  of  a  knowledge  of  the  principles  of  agricultural  chem- 
istry which  at  this  period  exerted  so  potent  an  influence  in  all  the 
processes  of  agriculture  and  particularly  in  the  methods  of  manuring 
crops.  Not  a  few  of  the  leading  and  most  intelligent  cotton  planters 
speedily  informed  themselves  of  the  progress  the  world  had  made  dur- 
ing the  war-time  isolation  of  the  cotton  States  and  began  to  make 
intelligent  application  of  this  knowledge  to  their  own  conditions. 
Numerous  agricultural  journals  were  established  and  devoted  large 
portions  of  their  space  to  the  discussion  of  the  subject  of  the  fertiliza- 
tion of  cotton  and  especially  of  the  use  of  chemical  manures.  Land- 
grant  colleges,  provided  for  by  the  act  of  Congress  of  1862,  were  now 
established  in  the  cotton  States,  which,  during  the  war,  had  been  excluded 
from  the  benefits  of  the  Federal  legislation,  and  did  much  to  popularize 
a  knowledge  of  the  natural  sciences  pertaining  to  agriculture  and  to 
enlighten  the  people  on  the  subject  of  commercial  fertilizers  and  the 
nature  and  proper  mode  of  use  of  chemical  manures.  Experiments 
of  a  more  or  less  tentative  character  were  carried  on  at  some  of  the  col- 
leges; plant  and  other  analyses  were  made  and  published;  and  the 
beginning  was  thus  made  in  the  study  of  the  scientific  fertilization  of 
cotton.  Finally,  when,  in  18S8,  agricultural  experiment  stations  were 
generally  established  in  connection  with  the  colleges,  a  number  of 
these — notably  those  of  Alabama,  Arkansas,  Georgia,  Louisiana,  Mis- 
sissippi, North  Carolina,  South  Carolina,  and  Tennessee — entered  upon 
careful  and  systematic  study  of  the  subject. 

Following  the  plan  previously  adopted  in  some  of  the  Northern  States, 
legislation  was  enacted  in  most  of  the  cotton  States  providing  for  the 
"official  control"  of  the  sale  of  commercial  fertilizers,  committed  vari- 
ously to  departments,  bureaus,  or  boards  of  agriculture,  and,  in  some 
instances,  to  the  colleges  of  agriculture.  These  laws — in  most  cases 
prescribing  minimum  contents  of  valuable  chemical  ingredients  in  the 
fertilizer  admissible  to  sale — were  intended  only  to  guarantee  the  gen- 
uineness of  the  manure  and  to  guard  the  purchaser  against  imposition 
in  the  composition  of  the  goods.  They  were  educative,  however,  in 
that  they  made  familiar  the  chemical  terms  "  available  phosphoric  acid," 
"potash,"  "nitrogen,"  "ammonia,"  etc.,  and  thus  aided  the  popular 
apprehension  of  the  functions  of  the  manure. 

As  early  as  1858  Mr.  Dickson  (hereinbefore  referred  to)  "  treated 
bones  with  acid,  according,"  as  he  says,  "  to  the  practice  of  Euglish 
farmers,*'  and  used  the  compound,  either  alone  or  mixed  with  Peruvian 
guano,  under  cotton.  Later  he  used  commercial  "dissolved  bone,"  and 
experimented  largely  with  it  and  other  commercial  manures.  In  I860 
he  published  a  little  book,  Dickson's  System  of  Farming,  consisting 
largely  of  a  collection  of  his  contributions  to  current  agricultural 
journals,  which  had  at  the  time  a  wide  circulation  and  excited  consid- 
erable interest.  In  it  he  strongly  recommends  good  tillage,  renovating 
crops,  and  rotation,  and  does  not  underestimate  the  value  of  "home 


THE    MANURING    OF    COTTON.  177 

manures,"  but  attaches  prime  importance  to  the  use  of  chemical  manures 
as  fertilizers  for  cotton,  on  which  subject  he  says: 

After  twenty  years  of  diligent  research  and  study  of  the  laws  of  nature  as  applieu 
to  agriculture,  with  the  experimental  use  of  Peruvian  guauo  aud  other  guanos  upon 
soils  and  crops,  I  have  determined  upon  the  following  combination  of  commercial 
manures  as  the  best  and  most  valuable  for  all  crops : 

Formula,  ''Dickson's  compound." 

Pounds. 

Peruvian  guano 100 

Dissolved  bones 100 

Common  salt 100 

Land  plaster 50 

Well  mixed. 
This  compound  I  have  now  been  using  for  many  years  upon  all  my  farm  crops,  and 
unfailingly  with  satisfactory  results.  In  my  hands,  and  under  my  system  of  farm- 
ing, this  compound  has  never  failed  to  grow  me  good  crops  and  bring  me  satisfac- 
tory dividends.  It  has  always  paid  me,  and  my  clear  profits  have  always  been 
larger  in  proportion  to  the.  amount  of  the  compound  applied — up  to  1,000  pounds 
per  acre.  I  have  long  since  learned  not  to  fear  failure  of  making  paying  crops,  no 
matter  the  season. 

Subsequently  Mr.  Dickson  modified  this  formula  somewhat  for  cot- 
ton, as  follows : 

Pounds 
per  acre. 

Dissolved  bones „ 250 

Peruvian  guano 165 

Land  plaster 100 

This  formula  was  based,  of  course,  upon  no  accurate  study  of  the 
cotton  plant  and  its  requirements,  but  was  merely  such  a  fairly  well- 
proportioned  mixture  of  concentrated  manures  as  experience  had  shown 
to  be  profitable.  Other  writers  were  inclined  to  dispute  the  impor- 
tance he  attached  to  Peruvian  guano,  suggesting-  other  combinations  of 
the  commercial  fertilizers  available,  and  the  battles  of  the  "humus," 
"mineral,"  and  other  theories  of  fertilization  were  fought  over  in  the 
agricultural  journals  without  much,  if  any,  careful  and  genuine  experi- 
mentation. Nevertheless,  "Dickson's  compound"  and  similar  mixtures 
were  used  to  a  considerable  extent,  and  no  doubt  with  profit. 

For  a  few  years  subsequently  to  1877  "composts"  attained  consider- 
able celebrity  as  fertilizers  for  cotton,  chiefly  through  the  practice 
and  writings  of  Mr.  Parish  Farman,  of  Baldwin  County,  Ga.  Eecog- 
nizing  the  nitrogenous  content  of  cotton  seed  and  stable  manure,  it  was 
recommended  to  compost  these  with  acid  phosphate  and  potash  salts 
and  thus  cheapen  the  cost  of  the  "complete  fertilizer"  as  compared 
with  that  of  the  "ammoniatcd"  guanos  sold  by  the  manufacturers. 
The  original  formula  for  a  compost  recommended  by  Mr.  Furman  was 
as  follows : 

Fur  mates  formula. 

Pounds. 

Barnyard  manure 750 

Cotton  seed 750 

Acid  phosphate 367 

Kainit 133 

2,  000 
To  be  used  at  the  rate  of  from  400  to  800  pounds  per  acre. 

1993— No.  33 12 


178  THE   COTTON    PLANT. 

These  exact  proportions  were  not  always  followed  by  those  who 
adopted  Mr.  Furman's  general  suggestion. 

The  general  plan  of  making  a  compost  was  to  put  down  on  an  earthen 
floor  a  layer  (usually  of  about  20  bushels)  of  stable  manure,  then  a  layer 
(20  bushels)  of  cotton  seed,  then  a  sack  (200  pounds)  of  acid  phosphate, 
with  occasional  addition  of  kainit  or  muriate  of  potash ;  then  repetition 
of  the  layers  to  any  extent  desired,  covering  the  whole  frequently  with 
a  layer  of  absorbent  earth.  The  compost  heap  was  protected  roughly 
from  the  weather,  frequently  in  a  latticed  pen,  and  kept  moderately 
moist.  It  was  put  up  in  the  autumn  immediately  after  the  close  of  the 
ginning  season  and  allowed  to  stand  until  spring.  It  was  then  cut 
down,  mixed,  and  applied  in  the  drill.  It  was  assumed  that  the  partial 
rotting  of  the  compost  in  the  heap  would  improve  its  quality  as  a 
manure.  Subsequently  it  was  doubted  whether  this  improvement  was 
sufficient  to  compensate  for  the  trouble  and  cost  of  making  the  heap, 
and  the  green  cotton  seed,  stable  manure,  and  acid  phosphate  were 
composted  (i.  e.,  simply  mixed  together)  in  the  drill  at  the  time  of  apply- 
ing the  fertilizer,  immediately  or  a  short  while  before  planting.  Coin- 
posting,  both  in  the  heap  and  in  the  drill,  is  still  practiced  to  a 
considerable  extent,  although  probably  not  so  largely,  relatively,  as 
when  first  introduced,  and  large  quantities  of  stable  manure  and  cotton 
seed  especially  are  thus  used  in  the  fertilization  of  cotton. 

Between  1870  and  1880  a  large  number  of  cotton-seed  oil  mills  were 
erected  in  the  cotton  States.  These  threw  upon  the  market,  at  com- 
paratively low  prices,  a  large  quantity  of  cotton- seed  meal,  for  which 
the  stock  and  cattle  of  the  country  did  not  furnish  a  sufficient  market 
for  complete  utilization  as  a  feeding  stuff.  Numerous  experiments 
demonstrated  the  suitability  of  cotton-seed  meal  as  an  uammoniater" 
in  fertilizers  for  cotton,  and  it  was  used  in  increasing  quantities  by  the 
manufacturers  of  ammoniated  fertilizers.  At  the  present  time  it  is 
probably  the  most  largely  used  source  of  nitrogen  in  the  commercial 
and  other  concentrated  manures  applied  to  cotton. 

As  popular  understanding  of  the  composition  and  functions  of  chem- 
ical manures  increased,  greater  variety  and  discrimination  were  observed 
in  the  purchase  of  commercial  fertilizers.  The  cotton  planter  was  for- 
tunate in  having  immediately  at  hand  the  main  constituents  of  manip- 
ulated manures.  Acid  phosphate  was  made  in  large  quantities  at 
Charleston,  from  the  South  Carolina  phosphate  rock,  and  subsequently 
at  numerous  other  points  in  the  Southern  States,  from  both  South 
Carolina  and  Florida  rock.  Cotton-seed  meal  was  produced  at  the 
numerous  oil  mills  in  the  South.  German  potash  salts  were  imported 
direct  into  Southern  ports,  and  a  limited  supply  of  ashes  rich  in  potash 
(15  to  25  per  cent)  was  furnished  by  the  oil  mills  which  used  cotton- 
seed hulls  largely  for  fuel.  Many  cotton  planters  began  to  purchase 
these  raw  materials  of  chemical  manures  and  use  them,  either  sepa- 
rately, or,  more  generally,  mixed  in  such  proportions  as  experience  (or 


THE    MANURING    OF    COTTON.  179 

perhaps,  more  truly,  reference  to  the  average  analyses  of  the  commer- 
cial ammoniated  fertilizers)  seemed  to  indicate  as  best  suited  to  the  re- 
quirements of  the  cotton  crop.  Numerous  "formula'"  were  used, none 
of  them  professing  to  be  based  upon  accurate  information  furnished  by 
strictly  scientific  experimentation,  but  providing  the  approximate  pro- 
portions of  available  phosphoric  acid,  potash,  and  nitrogen  which 
research  and  experiment  elsewhere  had  shown  to  be  adapted  to  crops 
in  general.    The  following  is  a  typical  example  of  the  mixtures  used; 

Pounds. 

Acid  phosphate 1, 200 

Cotton-seed  meal 600 

Kainit 200 

2,000 

If  muriate  of  potash  or  cotton-hull  ashes  were  used  in  place  of  kainit, 
the  amount  was  usually  smaller  and  the  proportion  of  acid  phosphate 
correspondingly  increased. 

As  the  raw  materials  varied  somewhat  in  quality  these  mixtures  also 
varied  in  analysis,  ranging,  in  general,  from  7  to  10  per  cent  of  avail- 
able phosphoric  acid,  2  to  4  of  nitrogen,  and  1  to  3  of  potash.  Such  mix- 
tures appeared  to  give  generally  satisfactory  results  with  cotton,  and 
were  and  still  are  used  quite  extensively  in  all  the  Southern  States. 
The  cotton-oil  mills  as  a  rule  were  willing  to  exchange  cotton-seed 
meal  for  cotton  seed,  generally  at  the  rate,  approximately,  of  1  pound 
of  meal  for  2  pounds  of  seed,  and  the  mixing  of  chemical  manures  on 
the  farm  was  thus  encouraged. 

Subsequently  to  1885  the  relative  quantities  of  acid  phosphate  (with 
or  without  a  small  content  of  potash)  purchased  by  the  cotton  growers, 
as  compared  with  the  amounts  of  ammoniated  guanos,  largely  increased, 
indicating  an  effort  to  supply  the  crop  with  its  nitrogenous  nutriment 
by  use  of  soiling  crops,  stable  manure,  green  and  rotted  cotton  seed, 
and  other  home  manures. 

SCIENTIFIC  EXPERIMENTS  BEARING  UPON  THE  MANURING  OF  COTTON. 

With  the  establishment  of  agricultural  experiment  stations  in  1888 
systematic  experimentation  in  the  fertilization  of  cotton  began,  mainly 
at  or  under  the  auspices  of  the  stations  in  the  cotton  States.  These 
experiments  have  been  diverse  in  character,  varied  in  conditions,  and 
unequal  in  the  attention,  care,  and  length  of  time  devoted  to  them. 
They  have  added  much  of  great  value  to  our  accurate  knowledge  on 
the  subject,  and  have  indicated  certain  conclusions  which  may  be  pro- 
visionally accepted  with  some  degree  of  confidence.  Upon  many  points, 
however,  they  have  not  yet  afforded  positive  and  definite  conclusions. 
The  apparent  results  of  the  experiments  are  in  many  cases  contra- 
dictory and  in  many  more  inconclusive.  This  is  not  to  be  considered 
surprising,  inasmuch  as  the  experiments,  without  exception,  have  been 
field  experiments,  subject  to  all  the  contingencies,  inconsistencies,  and 


180 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


misleading  results  incident  to  work  of  this  description.  No  pot  or 
water  culture  of  cotton  seems  to  have  been  undertaken ;  at  any  rate  no 
results  of  such  experiments  have  been  published. 

Research  and  experiments  at  the  stations  bearing  upon  cotton  culture 
have  covered  a  wide  range  of  investigation. 

Of  these  experiments  nothing  need  here  be  said  further  than  to 
note,  as  bearing  upon  the  subject  of  the  fertilization  of  cotton,  certain 
results  of  the  chemical  analysis  of  the  plant,  as  follows:1 

Fertilizing  constituents  contained  in  a  crop  of  cotton  yielding  300  pounds  of  lint  per  acre. 


Constituent. 


Nitrogen 

Phosphoric  acid 
Potassium  oxid 


Amount  per  acre. 


In  300 
pounds 

lint. 


J'er  cent. 
0.72 

.18 


In  054 

pounds 

seed. 


In  404 
pounds 

bolls. 


J'er  cent. 

20.08 

6.G6 

7.63 


Per  cent. 

4.  50 

1.14 

12.  20 


In  575 
pounds 
leaves. 


In  058 
pounds 
stems. 


In  250 
pounds 

roots. 


Per  cent.  •  J'er  cent. 
13.85  I  5.17 

2.57  '  1.22 

6.57  !  7.74 


Per  cent. 
1.62 

.38 
2.  75 


In  2,841 

pounds 

total 

crop. 


J'er  cent. 
45.04 
12.15 
39.11 


[The  average  production  of  cotton  per  acre  is  much  less  than  300  pounds  of  lint — probably  some- 
thing less  than  200  pounds.  A  calculation  accordingly  can,  however,  easily  be  made  from  the  figures 
given  above.] 

The  station  experiments  bearing  directly  upon  the  fertilization  ot 
cotton  may  be  roughly  classified,  by  the  end  in  view,  as  follows: 

(1)  To  test  the  yield  and  profit  from  the  use  of  fertilizers  as  com- 
pared with  unfertilized  soil. 

(2)  To  test  the  comparative  values  of  commercial  fertilizers  and 
home  manures. 

(3)  To  determine  the  kind  of  fertilizer  (chemical  manure)  best  suited 
to  cotton. 

(4)  To  determine  the  amount  of  fertilizer  giving  best  results. 

(5)  To  determine  the  best  mode  of  application  of  the  fertilizer, 

(6)  To  determine  the  best  time  of  application. 

(7)  Miscellaneous. 

Omitting  mention  of  such  experiments  as  were  manifestly  unreliable 
by  reason  of  accident,  omissions,  lack  of  care  and  attention,  or  from 
other  causes,  a  succinct  review  of  the  results  obtained  in  these  several 
lines  of  experimentation  is  here  presented. 

YIELD   AND    PROFIT   FROM   THE   USE   OF    FERTILIZERS    ON  COTTQN   AS  COMPARED  WITH 
YIELD   AND    PROFIT   FROM   UNFERTILIZED    SOIL. 

The  results  of  experiments  instituted  on  this  line  vary  greatly  with 
the  nature  of  the  soil,  the  seasons,  the  culture,  and  the  kinds  and 
amounts  of  manures  employed.  With  the  exception  of  those  upon  one 
class  of  soils,  however,  they  all  agree  in  demonstrating  that  large 
profit  attends  the  judicious  manuring  of  cotton.  The  exception  is  in 
the  case  of  the  "black  prairie"  or  "canebrake"  soils  of  the  alluvial 
formations  of  the  Gulf  States.     Experiments  upon  such  soils  at  the 


Tennessee  Sta.  Bui.,  Vol.  IV,  No.  5. 


THE    MANURING    OF    COTTON.  181 

Alabama1  stations  indicate  that  no  compensating  returns  may  be 
expected  from  the  use  of  manures  "except  crushed  cotton  seed  and 
cotton-seed  meal,  and  even  with  these  the  returns  are  small."  Drain- 
age and  good  mechanical  tillage  seem  to  be  the  chief  need  of  these 
soils.  Upon  other  soils  of  Alabama,  however,  "the  percentage  of  profit 
from  a  judicious  use  of  fertilizers, followed  by  intelligent  cultivation,  is 
most  satisfactory."  Upon  a  poor  sandy  soil,  with  no  retentive  clay 
within  3  feet  of  the  surface,  "  even  with  unusual  expense  for  fertilizers, 
the  increase  resulting  from  the  use  of  commercial  manures  paid  85  per 
cent  profit  on  cost." 

Experiments  made  under  direction  of  the  Arkansas  Station  indicate 
that  "fertilizers  are  generally  remunerative,"  the  percentage  of  profit 
ranging  from  20  to  180.  Five  hundred  pounds  per  acre  of  rotted  cot- 
ton seed  gave  a  net  profit  of  .$3.93.  Five  hundred  pounds  each  of  cotton 
seed  (at  $6.50  per  ton)  and  cotton-seed  meal  (at  $20  x>er  ton)  gave  equal 
financial  profit. 

At  the  Georgia  Station  the  use  of  commercial  fertilizers  was  almost 
always  profitable,  the  percentage  of  profit  ranging  from  5  to  250. 

The  stations  of  Louisiana,  Mississippi,  ]Sorth  Carolina,  and  South 
Carolina  obtain  similar  results  from  experiments,  and  indicate  that 
"  the  application  of  fertilizing  material  to  cotton  seems,  with  few  excep- 
tions, to  be  profitable." 

W.  B.  Dana2  states  that  in  1878  "the  increased  productiveness  due 
to  the  use  of  commercial  fertilizers  is  estimated  to  be  50  per  cent.  The 
effect  does  not  all  pass  off  the  first  season,  but  in  about  the  proportion 
of  70  per  cent  the  first  year,  20  per  cent  the  second  year,  and  10  per 
cent  the  third  year." 3 

To  the  teaching  of  these  specific  experiments  may  be  added  the  gen- 
eral experience  of  the  great  bulk  of  the  cotton  planters,  and  it  may  be 
accepted  as  proven  that  cotton  responds  favorably  to  artificial  manur- 
ing, and  that  upon  most  of  the  soils  of  the  cotton  States  all  kinds  of 
manures,  including  concentrated  commercial  fertilizers  at  the  prices  at 
which  they  are  commonly  held,  are  profitable  when  judiciously  used. 

COMPARATIVE    VALUES    OF    COMMERCIAL   FERTILIZERS   AXD   HOME    MANURES. 

Results  of  experiments  on  this  point  also  vary  considerably  with  the 
soil  and  season. 

In  Alabama,  green  manuring  appears  to  have  been  most  profitable 
upon  both  prairie  and  sandy  soils.  Peas  and  melilotus  both  gave 
good  results;  pea  vines  appeared  to  be  the  best  fertilizer  for  cotton ; 
peas  were    more   economical    for    green    manuring    for    one    season, 

'For  convenience,  reference  is  omitted  to  the  specific  title  and  page  of  authorities 
consulted  in  the  preparation  of  this  article.  A  short  bibliography  of  the  subject  is 
given  at  the  end  of  the  article  which  embraces  all  the  authorities  to  Avhich  reference 
is  made  or  from  which  quotations  are  taken. 

2Cotton  from  Seed  to  Loom. 

'Hammond  estimates  that  in  1889  627,899  tons  of  fertilizers  were  used  on  cotton  in 
the  United  States,  and  that  the  use  of  this  amount  of  fertilizer  resulted  in  an 
increased  crop  of  728,337  bales  of  seed  cotton,  or  a  little  over  9  per  cent  of  the  crop 
of  that  year. 


182  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

inelilotus  for  two;  stable  manure  generally  gave  good  results,  lasting 
in  effects;  upon  canebrake  soils,  both  drained  and  undrained,  crushed 
cotton  seed  and  stable  manure  each  gave  small  returns,  commercial 
fertilizers  none.  Upon  a  field  with  sandy  soil  which  had  not  been  culti- 
vated for  many  years  stable  manure,  contrasted  with  chemical  manures 
of  various  kinds  and  in  various  proportions,  produced  the  largest  increase 
and  the  largest  profit  per  acre,  but  it  was  noted  that  the  amount 
applied  was  at  the  rate  of  nearly  2  tons  per  acre,  or  one-half  ton  more 
than  the  amount  annually  saved  from  each  mule  kept.  "There  is  no 
question  about  the  efficacy  of  good  stable  manure  properly  used,  but 
the  available  supply  is  too  small." 

In  Arkansas,  cotton  seed  and  cotton-seed  meal  gave  best  results 
when  tested  against  acid  phosphate  and  kainit  separately.  On  worn 
sandy  bottom  lands  almost  continuously  planted  in  cotton  for  thirty 
years  cotton-seed  meal  and  stable  manure  each  gave  better  results  than 
chemical  manures,  and  better  results  when  used  alone  than  when  mixed 
with  acid  phosphate  and  kainit.  "There  is  no  better  fertilizer  for  cotton 
than  stable  and  barnyard  manure."  Other  experiments  indicated,  how- 
ever, that  stable  manure  (from  feeding  cotton  seed  and  pea-vine  hay) 
extended  the  growing  season  of  the  plant,  delayed  maturity  of  the 
crop,  and  hence  decreased  the  possible  yield  and  profit. 

In  Georgia,  cotton  seed  and  stable  manure  alone  were  found  unprofit- 
able as  compared  with  the  same  composted  with  acid  phosphate,  and 
gave  less  profit,  when  used  in  amounts  of  equal  cost,  than  chemical 
manures. 

In  Louisiana,  cotton  seed  and  stable  manure  alone  were  of  doubtful 
profit  as  compared  with  chemical  manures.  "Manure  from  the  farm 
should  be  reenforced  with  cotton-seed  meal  and  composted  with  acid 
phosphate.  *  *  *  The  compost  is  the  best  manure  in  the  world  for 
cotton."     The  formula  recommended  for  the  compost  is — 

Green  cotton  seed bushels..       100 

Stable  manure . . . .. do 100 

Acid  phosphate pounds..   2,  000 

Almost  as  effective  as  the  compost  was  a  homemade  chemical  manure, 
constructed  as  follows: 

\  Pounds. 

Acid  phosphate '. 1, 100 

Cotton-seed  meal 700 

Kainit 200 

In  Mississippi,  commercial  fertilizers  were  more  profitable  than  stable 
manure  or  cotton  seed  alone,  but  paid  best  in  connection  with  an  abun- 
dance of  organic  matter.  Composts  variously  proportioned  gave  best 
results. 

In  l^orth  Carolina,  barnyard  manure  was  found  to  be  especially  effect- 
ive, partly  on  account  of  its  after  effects,  and  somewhat  the  best  of  all 
fertilizers.  Its  first  cost  ($1  per  load),  however,  detracted  from  the 
profit,  and  a  combination  with  acid  phosphate  was  much  more  profitable. 


THE    MANURING    OF    COTTON.  183 

Home  composts  gave  generally  good  results,  and  next  to  these  a  home 
mixture  of — 

Pounds 
per  acre. 

Acid  phosphate 200 

Cotton-seed  meal 100 

Kainit 50 

KIND  OF  FERTILIZER  (CHEMICAL  MANURE)  REQUIRED  BY  OR  BEST  SUITED  TO  COTTON. 

Assuming  phosphoric  acid,  potash,  and  nitrogen  in  suitable  compounds 
to  be  the  three  chemical  substances  proper  and  possible  to  be  used  in 
the  fertilization  of  cotton,  the  experiments  have  been  mainly  conducted 
with  a  view  to  determine  the  relative  importance  of  these,  the  best  form 
of  each  (i.  e.,  of  the  compounds  available  in  commerce),  and  the  propor- 
tions of  each  in  a  mixed  fertilizer  most  suitable  to  the  requirements  of 
the  cotton  crop,  regard  being  had  to  the  character  of  the  soil  to  which 
they  were  applied  and  account  being  taken  of  the  profit  afforded. 

In  Alabama,  in  188S,  experiments  were  made  upon  a  sandy  drift  soil 
to  determine  the  proper  ratio  of  nitrogen  to  phosphoric  acid  in  fertilizers 
for  cotton .  The  amount  of  phosphoric  acid  was  constant — 200  pounds  of 
English  superphosphate  (12  per  cent  soluble)  per  acre — and  the  amount 
of  nitrogen  (in  dried  blood  and  cotton-seed  meal)  varied  so  as  to  furnish 
1  part  nitrogen  to  1,  2,  4,  6,  and  8  parts  phosphoric  acid.  The  smallest 
quantity  of  nitrogen  employed  gave  as  good  results  as  larger  quantities. 
No  difference  was  observed  in  the  two  sources  of  nitrogen.  In  1889  coop- 
erative experiments  under  direction  of  the  College  Station  were  made 
on  9  farms  furnishing  typical  soils  of  the  State.  The  fertilizers  used 
and  the  amounts  per  acre  were:  For  nitrogen,  sulphate  of  ammonia,  80 
pounds;  nitrate  of  soda,  100  pounds;  cotton-seed  meal,  200  pounds;  for 
phosphoric  acid,  dissolved  boneblack,  200  pounds;  for  potash,  kainit, 
100  pounds.  Green  cotton  seed  (960  pounds  per  acre)  and  stable  manure 
(3,000  pounds  per  acre)  alone  and  in  combination  with  acid  phosphate 
were  also  used.  The  fertilizers  were  applied  singly  and  in  various  com- 
binations to  fifteenth-acre  plats  without  duplication.  Some  of  the  experi- 
mentsprovedtobeof  little  value,  owing  to  mistakes  and  omissions;  others 
indicated  with  some  clearness  that  x»hosphoric  acid  was  the  ingredient 
chiefly  needed  in  the  soils  tested — sandy  and  brown  loam,  with  clay  sub- 
soil. An  experiment  was  also  made  with  cotton  on  newly  cleared  land, 
in  which  acid  phosphate  was  applied  on  two  plats,  acid  phosphate  and 
cotton- seed  meal  on  two,  and  no  manure  on  one.  The  results  indicated 
that  the  natural  soil  did  not  furnish  sufficient  nitrogen  and  was  very 
deficient  in  phosphoric  acid  for  the  requirements  of  the  crop.  In  1890 
an  experiment  was  made  on  fifteen  plats  in  a  field  which  had  not  been  cul- 
tivated for  many  years.  The  fertilizers  used  were  sulphate  of  ammonia, 
dissolved  boneblack,  and  kainit,  singly,  two  and  two,  and  all  three 
together.  Floats,  alone  and  in  combination,  separately,  with  sulphate 
of  ammonia  and  green  cotton  seed,  was  also  used,  as  also  stable  manure 
and  green  cotton  seed  singly.  Contrast  was  made  with  plats  receiving 
no  manure.    The  results  indicated  that  this  soil  needed  nitrogen  and 


184  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

potash,  but  was  most  deficient  in  phosphoric  acid  for  the  production  of 
the  crop.  This  experiment  and  another  on  a  sandy  drift  land  long  in 
cultivation  indicated  that  floats,  in  connection  with  cotton  seed,  was 
more  profitable  than  acid  phosphate.  In  1S91  cooperative  experiments 
were  made  on  30  farms  in  various  parts  of  the  State  with  different 
fertilizers  in  different  amounts  and  combinations.  The  experiments 
were  not  perfectly  accurate,  but  indicated  certain  conclusions.  Potash 
did  not  seem  to  pay;  phosphates  applied  alone  did  not  have  much  effect; 
nitrogenous  fertilizers  in  all  forms  gave  an  increased  yield.  In  1893 
certain  experiments  indicated  that  nitrogenous  fertilizers  (cotton-seed 
meal  and  nitrate  of  soda)  alone  on  cotton  pay  on  sandy  lands,  pro- 
viding there  are  good  rains  following  their  application. 

The  general  indications  afforded  by  the  great  number  and  variety  of 
cooperative  experiments  made  since  1888  under  the  auspices  of  the 
Alabama  Station,  upon  a  variety  of  soils  of  the  State,  the  majority  of 
which  were  sandy,  are  that  a  complete  fertilizer  is  needed  for  cotton. 
Phosphoric  acid  is  often  the  controlling  element,  and  a  sufficiency  of 
nitrogen  is  frequently  lacking  in  the  soil.  Potash  alone  does  not  pay. 
Phosphates  applied  alone  have  some  effect,  but  much  less  than  when 
combined  with  nitrogen.  Nitrogen,  particularly  in  organic  forms,  is 
profitable,  especially  in  connection  with  phosphates.  The  unfertilized 
soil  of  the  station  needs  nitrogen,  potash,  and  imosphoric  acid.  It  is 
especially  deficient  in  the  latter.  "  In  new  ground  the  decomposition  of 
the  vegetable  matter  in  the  soil  did  not  furnish  all  of  the  nitrogen 
needed  by  the  cotton ;  the  increase  from  phosphates  alone  was  satis- 
factory, but  the  increase  caused  by  the  addition  of  nitrogen  did  not 
justify  its  use."  As  to  floats,  the  experience  of  several  years  indicated 
that  a  part  of  the  phosphoric  acid  becomes  available  to  the  plant  the 
first  season,  but  the  solubility  is  much  facilitated  by  combining  the 
floats  with  cotton  seed  or  cotton-seed  meal. 

In  Arkansas,  in  1889,  experiments  were  made  on  sandy  bottom  land 
which  had  been  almost  continuously  planted  in  cotton,  without  manur- 
ing, for  thirty  years.  Acid  phosphate,  cotton-seed  meal,  and  kainit 
were  used  singly  and  in  combination ;  also  stable  manure  and  composts 
in  different  amounts.  Nitrogenous  manures  alone  were  profitable. 
Neither  acid  phosphate  nor  kainit  alone  paid.  All  of  the  different 
plats  on  which  cotton-seed  meal  was  used,  either  singly  or  in  combina- 
tion, gave  some  profit,  and  u  this  was  due  not  to  the  acid  phosphate  or 
kainit,  but  to  the  cotton-seed  meal."  These  results  were  confirmed  by 
similar  experiments  made  in  1891.  Cooperative  experiments  made  in 
1888  at  five  points  in  the  State,  and  repeated  in  subsequent  years,  indi- 
cated that  a  complete  chemical  fertilizer  is  needed  for  cotton.  A  com- 
bination is  provisionally  recommended  of — 

Pounds 
per  acre. 

Acid  phosphate 200 

Cottou-seed  meal 200 

Muriate  of  potash 50 


THE    MANURING    OF    COTTON.  185 

In  Georgia  a  series  of  excellently  arranged  and  very  carefully  con- 
ducted experiments  have  been  in  progress  upon  tlie  station  farm  since 
1890.  The  soil  of  the  station  is  somewhat  irregular  in  character,  but 
is,  for  the  most  part,  a  gray  sandy  loam  underlaid  by  yellow  clay  and, 
previous  to  the  institution  of  the  experiments,  had  been  in  continu- 
ous cultivation  for  a  number  of  years.  Fertilizing  materials  in  great 
variety  and  in  many  different  combinations  were  used.  The  results  of 
the  experiments  have  not  been  strictly  accordant,  but  the  folio  wing  gen- 
eral conclusions  seem  to  be  provisionally  warranted.  Cotton  requires 
a  complete  manure,  i.e.,  one  containing  soluble  phosphoric  acid,  potash, 
and  nitrogen.  Neither  phosphoric  acid  nor  potash  give  as  good  results 
alone  as  when  combined  with  each  other.  Phosphoric  acid  alone 
largely  surpasses  no  manure.  Potash  alone  is  doubtful;  sometimes  it 
affects  the  yield  injuriously.  Nitrogen  alone  has  little  or  no  effect,  but 
has  very  decided  effects  when  mixed  with  phosphoric  acid  and  potash. 
In  some  cases  nitrogen  seems  to  be  the  controlling  element  in  a  ferti- 
lizer, but,  on  the  whole,  phosphoric  acid  is  most  effective  in  increasing 
the  yield.  Cotton-seed  meal  (and  cotton  seed)  and  nitrate  of  soda 
seem  to  be  the  best  forms  of  nitrogen  for  cotton  and  are  about  equal  in 
value,  proportionately  to  the  content  of  nitrogen.  There  is  little  or  no 
difference  in  the  value  of  kainit  and  muriate  of  potash.  The  phos- 
phoric acid  in  floats  and  Florida  soft  phosphate  is  not  in  a  sufficiently 
soluble  and  available  condition  to  answer  the  needs  of  the  cotton  crop. 
The  best  proportions  of  the  three  elements  in  a  complete  fertilizer  for 
cotton  are,  approximately,  nitrogen,  1  part;  potash,  1  part;  phosphoric 
acid,  3J  parts.  Of  such  a  complete  fertilizer  the  quantity  to  be  used 
per  acre  should  be  an  amount  furnishing  nitrogen,  20  pounds;  potash, 
20  pounds;  phosphoric  acid,  70  pounds. 

In  Louisiana  admirably  conceived  and  carefully  conducted  series  of 
field  experiments  in  the  fertilization  of  cotton  have  been  made  both  at 
the  State  Station,  at  Baton  Eouge,  and  at  the  North  Louisiana  Station, 
at  Calhoun,  beginning  in  1886  and  still  in  progress.  Plats  of  uniform 
size  were  manured  with  nitrogenous,  phosphatic,  and  potash  fertilizers 
of  different  hinds  aud  in  different  proportions,  separately  and  in  great 
variety  of  combination.     The  questions  tested  were: 

(1)  Do  these  soils  (the  worn  "sandy  lands"  aud  ared  lands"  of 
Louisiana)  need  nitrogen  to  grow  cotton  profitably?  If  so,  in  what  form 
can  it  be  best  presented,  and  in  what  quantities  per  acre? 

(2)  Do  these  soils  need  phosphoric  acid?  If  so,  which  is  the  best 
form,  and  in  what  quantities  per  acre? 

(3)  Do  these  soils  need  potash?  If  so,  which  is  the  best  form,  and  in 
what  quantities  per  acre? 

The  results  of  the  experiments  were,  in  some  instances,  inconclusive, 
and  in  some  apparently  contradictory,  as  the  seasons  and  the  condi- 
tions varied.  On  the  whole,  however,  the  followiug  conclusions  seem 
justified  as  the  result  of  the  entire  series  of  experiments : 

(1)  These  soils  need  nitrogen,  and  nitrogenous  manures  may  profit- 
ably be  used  in  the  fertilization  of  cotton. 


186  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

(la)  All  forms  of  nitrogenous  matters  (vegetable,  animal,  and  min- 
eral) are  satisfactory  and  profitable,  but,  on  the  whole,  they  stand  in 
the  following  order  of  excellence:  (a)  vegetable  (cotton  seed  and  cotton- 
seed meal);  (b)  animal  (dried  blood,  fish  scrap  etc.);  and  (c)  mineral 
(sulphate  of  ammonia  and  nitrate  of  soda). 

(lb)  One  ration  (24  pounds)  of  nitrogen  per  acre  is  more  profitable 
than  larger  quantities. 

(2)  These  soils  need  phosphoric  add.  Phosphatic  manures  may  be 
profitably  used  in  the  fertilization  of  cotton.  They  are  not  so  neces- 
sary (upon  these  soils),  however,  as  nitrogen. 

(2a)  The  soluble  forms  of  phosphoric  acid  (in  dissolved  boneblack 
and  acid  phosphate)  are  emphatically  better  than  the  insoluble  forms 
(in  floats  and  similar  materials). 

(2  b)  One  ration  (24  pounds  per  acre)  of  phosphoric  acid  is  more  profit- 
able than  larger  quantities. 

(3)  Potash  in  no  form,  either  alone  or  combined  with  other  manures, 
is  needed  for  these  soils.  Potash  manures  are  not  profitable  in  the 
fertilization  of  cotton. 

"It  is  very  certaiu  that  phosphoric  acid  is  needed  to  grow  cotton 
successfully,  but  in  small  quantities  and  combined  always  with  nitrog- 
enous manures." 

In  Mississippi  experiments  in  the  fertilization  of  cotton  were  made 
at  the  College  Station  and  at  Holly  Springs  in  1888-1893.  Tbe  results 
indicate  that  on  upland  soils  the  fertilizer  should  be  rich  in  organic 
matter  and  nitrogen  and  contain  more  potash  than  phosphoric  acid. 
On  sandy  valley  lands  the  phosphoric  acid  should  predominate.  Lime 
soils  require  large  quantities  of  potash.  On  soils  poor  in  lime  potash 
was  not  needed  or  did  not  pay.  On  black  prairie  lands  the  value  of 
concentrated  fertilizers  was  not  definitely  indicated.  The  results  in 
different  years  were  conflicting.  Cotton-hull  ashes  were  found  to  be  an 
excellent  form  of  potash. 

In  North  Carolina  experiments  "on  representative  soils  of  the  chief 
geological  areas  in  the  State"  were  conducted  in  1890-1894.  Stable 
manure  gave  best  general  results  in  yield,  but  was  not  always  most 
profitable  on  account  of  initial  cost.  Next  to  stable  manure,  a  "com- 
plete fertilizer"  gave  best  results,  and  the  proportions  per  acre  recom- 
mended are: 

Pounds. 

Acid  phosphate 200 

Cotton-seed  meal 100 

Kainit 50 

Acid  phosphate  alone  was,  for  the  most  part,  profitable.  Cotton-seed 
meal  alone  was  profitable  in  the  majority  of  cases.  Kainit  alone  was 
unprofitable  except  in  the  case  of  the  poor  sandy  lands  of  eastern  North 
Carolina. 

In  South  Carolina  a  very  elaborate  and  most  carefully  conducted 
series  of  experiments  was  made  upon  the  station  farms  (two),  situated 


THE  MANURING  OF  COTTON.  187 

in  different  sections  of  the  State,  and  extending  over  three  years— 
1888-1890.  The  soils  selected  were  typical  of  the  "upland"  soils  of  the 
cotton  States,  and  were  "very  thin,  being  greatly  exhausted  by  years 
of  improvident  culture."  Applications  of  fertilizers  (phosphatic,  nitrog- 
enous, and  potash)  of  various  kinds  were  made,  separately  and  in 
various  combinations,  and  in  different  amounts,  but  more  particularly 
in  the  approximate  quantities  and  proportions  shown  by  existing 
analyses  of  the  cotton  plant  to  be  necessary  for  the  requirements  of 
the  crop.  The  details  of  the  experiments  and  the  results  have  been 
reported  in  a  bulletin  of  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture.1 
The  conclusions  reached  are  in  part  as  follows: 

(1)  Cotton  requires  nitrogen,  phosphoric  acid,  and  potash. 

(2)  Of  the  three,  phosphoric  acid  is  relatively  the  most  important 
and  controls  the  action  of  the  other  two.  It  can  be  used  alone  with 
some  advantage  to  the  crop,  but  much  more  effectively  in  connection 
with  potash  and  nitrogen. 

(3)  Nitrogen  is  relatively  more  important  than  potash.  It  can  only 
be  advantageously  used  in  combination  with  phosphoric  acid  or  phos- 
phoric acid  and  potash. 

(4)  Potash,  like  nitrogen,  is  of  little  value  to  cotton  when  applied 
separately;  it  must  be  combined  with  the  other  constituents. 

(5)  Expressed  in  terms  of  the  latest  analyses  of  the  cotton  plant, 
the  proportions  and  amounts  of  nitrogen,  phosphoric  acid,  and  potash 
required  are  as  follows:  Between  three-sevenths  and  four-sevenths 
nitrogen,  about  four  and  one-fourth  phosphoric  acid,  and  between  one- 
third  and  one-half  potash.  With  proper  allowance  for  the  cost,  as  well 
as  the  effect  of  each  application,  the  requirements  maybe  more  exactly 
given  as  follows:  Nitrogen,  0.13;  phosphoric  acid,  1.16;  potash,  0.38. 
In  other  words,  the  required  proportions  are:  Nitrogen,  1;  phosphoric 
acid,  2^;  potash,  f ;  and  the  amounts  called  for  by  a  crop  yielding  300 
pounds  of  lint  per  acre  are:  Nitrogen,  20  pounds;  phosphoric  acid,  50 
pounds;  potash,  15  pouuds. 

(6)  The  amount  of  phosphoric  acid  determines  the  amount  of  nitro- 
gen and  potash.  With  a  given  amount  of  the  first,  only  certain 
amounts  of  the  last  two  can  be  profitably  used. 

(7)  Potash  can  be  as  effectively  supplied  by  muriate  of  potash  or 
kainit  as  it  can  by  sulphate  of  potash. 

(8)  Phosphoric  acid  is  of  value  to  cotton  in  proportion  to  its  solu- 
bility; hence,  the  several  kinds  of  phosphatic  manures  can  not  be 
indifferently  employed.  Preference  must  be  given  to  acid  phosphates 
containing  considerable  percentages  of  soluble  phosphoric  acid.  Insol- 
uble phosphoric  acid  in  slag,  floats,  or  marl  is  of  little  direct  value  to 
the  crop  upon  which  it  is  applied,  and  even  granting  that  its  effects  in 
the  soil  may  be  lasting  they  are  not,  in  the  long  run,  sufficiently  pro- 
nounced to  meet  the  interest  on  the  capital  invested  in  the  application. 

'Farmers'  Bui.  14. 


188  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

(9)  Inorganic,  organic,  and  mixed  nitrogen  are  of  very  nearly  equal 
value  to  cotton.  The  slight  difference  is  in  favor  of  the  last  two. 
Stable  manure  containing  organic  nitrogen  is  the  best  fertilizer  of  its 
class,  and  is  lasting  or  cumulative  in  its  effects.  The  organic  nitrogen 
of  stable  manure,  to  the  amount  of  50  per  cent,  can  be  fully  replaced 
by  the  inorganic  nitrogen  of  nitrate  of  soda.  As  between  cotton  seed 
and  cotton-seed  meal,  there  is  a  slight  difference  in  favor  of  the  latter. 
Whole  cotton  seed  is  as  efficacious  as  ground  cotton  seed.  Inorganic 
nitrogen  in  nitrate  of  soda  is  about  as  valuable  to  cotton  as  organic 
nitrogen  in  cotton  seed  or  cotton-seed  meal. 

The  results  obtained  in  Georgia  and  South  Carolina  are  worthy  of 
special  consideration  in  this  connection,  as  the  experiments  yielding 
them  were  conducted  specifically  for  determination  of  the  points  now 
under  discussion. 

THE  AMOUNT   OF   FERTILIZER   PER  ACRE   GIVING   BEST   RESULTS. 

The  experiments  bearing  upon  this  question  are  somewhat  meager 
and  the  results  uncertain.  The  amount  of  fertilizer  which  may  be 
judiciously  and  profitably  employed  is  shown  clearly  to  depend  upon 
the  character,  condition,  and  previous  treatment  of  the  soil,  and  to 
some  extent  upon  the  season.  Very  few  systematic  experiments  have 
been  made  to  test  this  specific  question. 

In  Alabama  one  series  of  experiments  indicated  that  an  application 
of  1,000  pounds  per  acre  of  a  complete  fertilizer  was  not  as  profitable 
as  one  of  500  pounds,  although  the  yield  was  somewhat  increased. 

In  Georgia  large  doses  of  fertilizer  applied  at  planting  or  during  the 
earlier  periods  of  growth  resulted  in  earlier  maturity  of  the  crop,  with- 
out, however,  sensible  increase  in  profit.  The  results  of  experiments 
conducted  for  several  years  on  series  of  plats  of  gravelly  gray  soil  with 
yellow  subsoil,  in  which  fertilizers  were  applied  at  the  rates  of  400,  600, 
and  1,200  pounds  per  acre,  indicated — 

(1)  That,  while  heavy  doses  of  fertilizers  do  not  give  a  corresponding 
increase  in  the  yield  of  cotton,  or  so  large  a  percentage  of  profit,  yet 
such  heavy  applications,  within  reasonable  limits,  are  judicious,  pro- 
vided the  land  is  in  good  condition. 

(2)  That  the  limit  or  maximum  amount  of  fertilizers  that  can  be 
safely  and  profitably  applied  to  land  in  good  condition  varies  consider- 
ably, say  from  500  to  1,000  pounds  per  acre,  according  to  seasons,  vari- 
ety of  cotton,  etc.  In  these  experiments  the  maximum  amount  that 
was  immediately  profitable  was  probably  between  500  and  700  pounds 
per  acre. 

It  is  concluded  that,  in  general,  the  most  effective  amount  of  ferti- 
lizer was  652.6  pounds  per  acre,  compounded  as  follows : 

Pounds. 

Acid  phosphate ,468 

Nitrate  of  soda 130 

Muriate  of  potash 54.  6 

652.6 


THE    MANURING    OF    COTTON.  189 

or  such  an  equivalent  amount  of  similar  mixtures  as  will  furnish  per 
acre,  approximately,  phosphoric  acid,  70  pounds ;  nitrogen,  20  pounds ; 
potash,  20  pounds. 

It  has  been  shown  that  $8  worth  of  a  well-balanced  fertilizer  may  be  expected  to 
increase  the  yield  of  seed  cotton  on  1  acre  1,000  pounds.  But  such  results  can 
only  be  attained  by  concentrating  the  fertilizer  on  the  best  land,  not  by  scattering 
it  at  the  rate  of  100  or  200  pounds  to  the  acre  over  a  large,  worn-out  plantation.  The 
mistake  should  not  be  made  of  applying  large  amounts  of  concentrated  fertilizers  on 
thin,  worn-out  land.  The  larger  the  application  the  more  important  is  it  that  the 
land  be  in  the  best  possible  condition. 

In  North  Carolina  heavy  applications  of  stable  manure,  while  some- 
what proportionately  increasing  the  yield,  were  not  profitable. 

In  South  Carolina  it  is  concluded  that  "the  amount  of  phosphoric 
acid  and  proportionate  amounts  of  nitrogen  and  potash  can  not  be 
indefinitely  increased  with  the  expectation  of  obtaining  a  correspond- 
ing increase  in  the  crop.  The  gain  in  crop  does  not  keep  pace  with 
increase  of  fertilizers,  and  a  point  is  speedily  reached  beyond  which 
this  gain  is  not  sufficient  to  meet  the  additional  cost  of  the  heavier 
applications.  The  soil  can  not  be  profitably  forced ;  the  application  of 
fertilizers  must  be  regulated  by  its  mechanical  as  well  as  chemical  con- 
dition." The  maximum  quantity  of  fertilizer  that  can  in  general  be 
used  with  advantage  is  concluded  to  be  an  amount  that  will  furnish 
per  acre  phosphoric  acid,  50  pounds;  potash,  15  pounds;  nitrogen,  20 
pounds. 

BEST  MODE   OF   APPLICATION   OE   FERTILIZERS   TO   COTTON. 

In  Alabama  experiments  in  1887  indicated  that  broadcasting  compost 
and  stable  manure  gave  better  results  than  application  in  the  drill. 

In  Georgia  the  results  of  general  experiments  indicate  that  "  it  is  by 
no  means  necessary,  nor  is  it  desirable,  to  broadcast  the  fertilizer  when 
less  than  1,500  pounds  are  to  be  applied  to  an  acre  of  corn  or  cotton  or 
other  wide-row  crop.  If  only  500  pounds  are  to  be  applied,  distribute 
it  in  a  deep  furrow  and  mix  it  by  running  two  scooter  furrows  through 
it.  If  more  than  500  pounds,  then  divide  the  amount  between  the 
center  furrow  and  the  two  listing  furrows.  Broadcast  manuring  should, 
as  a  rule,  be  confined  to  crops  that  are  planted  broadcast,  as  small 
grain,  grass,  etc." 

The  experience  and  the  practice  at  the  stations  generally  substan- 
tiate the  conclusion  reached  in  South  Carolina  that  "  fertilizers  may  be 
iudifferently  drilled  or  broadcasted  where  they  are  liberally  applied, 
but  drilling  is  to  be  preferred  where  small  amounts  are  employed." 

BEST  TIME   OF   APPLICATION   OF   FERTILIZERS  TO   COTTON. 

A  number  of  experiments  have  been  made  to  test  the  effects  of  inter- 
cultural  applications  of  fertilizers,  the  results  ®f  which,  however,  are 
for  the  most  part  discordant  and  inconclusive. 


.190  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Iu  Alabama  one  set  of  experiments,  in  1888,  indicated  that  one 
application  of  the  fertilizer  in  the  drill  before  planting  gave  best  results. 

[Another,  in  1890,  was  very  carefully  conducted]  in  order  to  teat  the  efficacy  of 
the  application  of  additional  fertilizer  during  the  growth  of  the  plant  in  prolonging 
its  fruiting  period  and  increasing  the  yield.  Two  hundred  pounds  of  cotton-seed 
meal  per  acre  were  applied  at  the  second  plowing  of  the  cotton,  June  18,  and  cov- 
ered lightly  with  the  scrape.  Two  hundred  more  were  applied  in  the  same  way  at 
the  last  plowing,  July  30.  These  were  applied  to  two  plats  to  which  200  pounds 
of  cotton-seed  meal  and  acid  phosphate,  mixed  in  equal  parts  of  each,  were  applied 
in  the  drill  before  planting,  and  were  compared  with  a  third  plat  to  which  the  same 
quantity  of  cotton-seed  meal  and  acid  phosphate  were  applied  at  planting,  but  to 
which  no  subsequent  applications  were  made.  The  average  increase  caused  by  the 
additional  applications  was  339  pounds  of  seed  cotton  per  acre.  The  iutercultural 
applications  had  the  effect  of  continuing  the  growth  and  fruitfulness  of  the  cotton 
after  that  on  plat  3  had  ceased  to  grow. 

In  1893,  however,  it  was  found  that  200  pounds  of  mixed  nitrate 
of  soda  and  cotton-seed  meal  applied  (to  previously  fertilized  plats) 
in  June  was  as  profitable  as  100  pounds  in  June  and  100  pounds  in 
July.  The  addition  of  cotton-seed  meal  as  late  as  August  13  was  not 
profitable. 

Tn  Georgia  it  has  been  found  that  marked  effects  result  from  inter- 
cultural  fertilization,  or  successive  applications  of  fertilizers  during  the 
growing  season.  When  a  heavy  application  of  a  readily  available 
fertilizer  is  to  be  made,  it  would  be  advisable  to  divide  it  into  at  least 
two  doses,  and  possibly  more. 

In  Louisiana  the  conclusion  is  reached  that  fertilizers  for  cotton 
should  all  be  applied  at  time  of  planting.  A  second  and  third  appli- 
cation is  not  profitable. 

MISCELLANEOUS  EXPERIMENTS. 

Incidentally  to  the  main  objects  for  which  the  experiments  in  the 
fertilization  of  cotton  were  instituted,  certain  indications  on  miscellane- 
ous and  minor  points  have  been  afforded. 

The  general  experience  at  the  stations  and  elsewhere  is  to  the  effect 
that  chemical  manures  generally,  and  especially  nitrogenous  and  phos- 
phatic  manures,  hasten  the  maturity  of  the  crop.  Stable  manure  in 
some  instances  (Arkansas,  North  Carolina)  delayed  maturity  beyond 
the  fruiting  period. 

The  cumulative  effect  of  manures  in  the  soil  is  fairly  well  evidenced 
in  several  cases.  Nitrogenous  manures  increased  the  yield  the  second 
season  without  additional  fertilization  (Alabama,  Arkansas),  but  not 
the  third  season  (Alabama).  Phosphatic  manures  increased  the  yield, 
without  additional  fertilization,  the  second  and  third  seasons  (Ala- 
bama). The  cumulative  effects  of  heavy  applications  of  a  complete 
fertilizer  were  manifest  the  second  and  the  third  years  (Georgia). 
Floats  alone  gave  a  greater  increase  over  no  manure  the  third  year 
after  application  than  in  the  first  or  second  year  (Alabama). 

Kainit  is  recommended  as  a  specific  for  rust  and  blight  in  cotton,  to 


THE    MANURING    OF    COTTON.  191 

be  used  in  connection  with  cotton  seed  or  cotton-seed  meal  (North 
Carolina).  Kainit  appears  to  retard  the  appearance  of  blight  (Ala- 
bama).   Kainit  retards  the  opening  of  the  bolls  (Arkansas). 

"Marl,  alone  or  in  combination  with  commercial  fertilizers,  is  of  no 
direct  value  to  cotton.  Applied  upon  leguminous  crops,  which  are  to  be 
turned  under  as  a  preparation  for  cotton,  its  indirect  value  is  great" 
(South  Carolina).  Air-slacked  lime  mixed  in  the  drill  with  acid  phos- 
phate and  floats  had  no  apparent  effect  upon  the  crop  (Alabama). 

Applications  of  copperas  are  without  effect  upon  cotton  (feouth 
Carolina). 

Nitrate  of  soda  should  generally  be  applied  with  the  other  fertilizers 
at  the  time  of  plantiug  (South  Carolina);  but,  on  the  other  hand,  it  may- 
be profitably  divided  into  two  applications,  the  second  not  to  be  later 
tban  Junel  (Georgia). 

The  quantity  of  nitrogen  in  the  fertilizer  seems  not  to  affect  the  rela- 
tions between  the  weight  of  seed  and  lint  (Alabama). 

Shallow  applications  of  fertilizers  (i.  e.,  at  depth  of  2  or  3  inches)  give 
better  results  than  deeper  applications  (Louisiana). 

There  is  no  advantage  in  separating  the  ingredients  of  the  fertilizer 
and  applying  them  at  different  depths  (Louisiana). 

It  is  highly  important  that  the  fertilizer  be  well  mixed  with  a  consid- 
erable portion  of  soil  (Georgia). 

The  cowpea  is  an  excellent  green  manuring  crop  in  preparation  of  land 
for  cotton  (Alabama,  Arkansas,  Louisiana,  Georgia).  The  most  profit- 
able method  of  application  is  to  gather  the  peas,  or  cut  the  vines  for 
hay,  and  turn  under  the  stubble  with  addition  of  the  manure  from  stock 
fed  with  the  hay  (Alabama,  Arkansas,  Georgia). 

GENERAL   CONCLUSIONS. 

In  reviewing  the  results  of  the  experiments  conducted  at  or  under 
the  auspices  of  the  experiment  stations,  and  taking  into  account  the 
general  experience  of  successful  cotton  growers,  certain  general  con- 
clusions on  the  subject  of  the  fertilization  of  cotton  may  be  accepted 
as  tentatively  established : 

(1)  Cotton  is  a  plant  which  responds  promptly,  liberally,  and  profit- 
ably to  judicious  fertilization. 

(2)  By  judicious  fertilization  the  maturity  of  the  crop  may  be  has- 
tened and  the  period  of  growth,  from  germination  to  fruiting,  so  short- 
ened as  to  materially  increase  the  climatic  area  within  which  cotton 
may  be  profitably  grown. 

(3)  As  is  the  case  with  most  other  crops,  the  profit  from  manuring 
cotton  with  concentrated  fertilizers  is  much  enhanced  by  antecedent 
proper  preparation  of  the  soil.  It  pays  to  bring  cotton  lands  up  to  a 
condition  of  good  "tilth"  by  mechanical  treatment,  and  especially  by 
incorporating  in  them  liberal  quantities  of  organic  matter.     Upon  lands 


192  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

in  such  condition  fertilizers  of  all  kinds  yield  more  profit,  either  from 
small  or  large  applications,  than  upon  lands  not  so  treated. 

(4)  Benovatiug  crops,  and  especially  the  cowpea,  furnish  an  efficient 
and  economical  method  of  bringing  cotton  lands  into  condition  to 
respond  most  liberally  and  profitably  to  tlie  application  of  concentrated 
manures  under  cotton.  The  most  profitable  plan  of  employing  the  cow- 
pea  for  this  purpose  on  cotton  is  to  gather  the  peas  at  maturity,  cut  the 
vines  for  hay,  and  turn  under  the  stubble  along  with  the  manure  result- 
ing from  feeding  the  hay  to  stock  and  cattle. 

(5)  Barnyard  manure  and  similar  bulky  manures  are  more  efficient 
and  profitable  as  soil  renovators  than  as  specific  fertilizers  for  cotton. 
They  should  be  broadcast  liberally  and  used  rather  as  soil  improvers 
than  as  immediate  fertilizers.  The  same  is  probably  true  of  cotton 
seed,  except  where  the  price  to  be  had  for  the  seed  at  cotton-oil  mills 
justifies  the  exchange  of  seed  for  cotton-seed  meal,  to  be  used  as  the 
source  of  nitrogen  in  a  concentrated  manure.  If,  however,  only  small 
quantities  of  such  manures  are  to  be  had,  and  it  is  desired  to  use  them 
as  direct  fertilizers,  it  is  more  profitable  to  compost  them  with  acid 
phosphate  (preferably  containing  a  small  percentage  of  potash)  than  to 
use  them  alone.  It  is  more  profitable  to  compost  directly  in  the  drill 
at  time  of  planting  than  in  heaps  previously. 

(6)  Cotton  may  wisely  be  assigned  a  place  in  a  judicious  rotation  sys- 
tem. Upon  lands  devoted  to  staple  crops  a  three  years'  rotation — small 
grain,  corn  (with  peas),  cotton — is  judicious.  Each  crop  in  the  rotation 
should  be  appropriately  fertilized.  It  is  in  evidence  that  the  cumula- 
tive effects  of  such  manuring  upon  the  succeeding  crop  are  marked. 

(7)  Upon  the  great  majority  of  the  soils  of  the  cotton-growing  States 
it  is  advisable  and  profitable  to  use,  as  a  concentrated  fertilizer,  a 
"complete  manure,"  i.  e.,  one  containing  soluble  phosphoric  acid,  avail- 
able potash,  and  available  nitrogen,  rather  than  a  manure  containing 
only  one  or  two  of  these  iugredients.  Nitrogen,  however,  may  proba- 
bly be  advantageously  omitted  from  the  concentrated  fertilizer,  in 
whole  or  in  part,  when  the  soil  has  previously  been  liberally  supplied 
with  this  ingredient,  through  barnyard  manure,  green  manuring,  etc. 

(8)  "Soluble"  phosphates  are  very  much  to  be  preferred  in  the  fer- 
tilizer for  cotton  to  those  which  are  not  soluble. 

(9)  There  is  no  great  difference,  if  any,  in  the  agricultural  value  and 
profit,  when  used  in  the  fertilizer  for  cotton,  of  the  various  soluble  pot- 
ash salts  to  be  had  in  commerce,  except  proportionately  to  the  price 
and  content  of  actual  potash. 

(10)  Of  the  nitrogen  compounds  available  for  use  in  fertilizers  the 
organic  forms  (vegetable  and  animal)  are  perhaps  best  suited  to  cotton, 
if  one  form  alone  be  used,  although  nitrate  of  soda  is  probably  nearly 
if  not  quite  of  equal  value.  Further  experiments  are  needed  to  deter- 
mine the  efficacy  of  mixing  various  nitrogen  compounds  in  different 
proportions. 


THE  MANURING  OF  COTTON.  193 

(11)  The  most  judicious  proportions  of  soluble  phosphoric  acid,  pot- 
ash, and  nitrogen  in  a  complete  fertilizer  for  cotton  can  not  be  said  to 
have  been  as  yet  determined  with  entire  accuracy.  Those  suggested 
by  Georgia — nitrogen  1,  potash  1,  phosphoric  acid  34 — and  by  South 
Carolina — nitrogen  1,  potash  f,  phosphoric  acid  2^ — perhaps  approxi- 
mate reasonable  accuracy.  In  the  light  of  present  information,  perhaps 
nitrogen  1,  potash  1,  phosphoric  acid  2§  or  3  would  not  be  injudicious 
proportions  for  general  use. 

(12)  The  amount  of  concentrated  fertilizer  which  may  profitably  be 
used  per  acre  varies  widely  with  the  nature  and  condition  of  the  soil, 
the  seasons,  and  other  circumstances.  For  an  average  soil  in  fairly 
good  condition  perhaps  the  maximum  amounts  indicated  by  Georgia 
(nitrogen,  20  pounds;  potash,  20  pounds;  phosphoric  acid,  70  pounds), 
or  by  South  Carolina  (nitrogen,  20  pounds;  potash,  15  pounds;  phos- 
phoric acid,  50  pounds),  or  an  approximate  mean  of  the  two  would  be 
the  maximum  limit  of  profitable  application.  The  actual  weight  of  the 
complete  fertilizer  furnishing  these  quantities  would,  of  coarse,  vary 
with  the  percentage  composition  in  nitrogen,  potash,  and  phosphoric 
acid  of  the  materials  used  to  make  the  fertilizer.  If  the  commercial 
"ammoniated"  fertilizer  or  other  concentrated  manure  intended  for 
use  under  cotton  should  be  compounded  (as  it  might  very  well  be,  and 
in  some  cases  is)  to  analyze  approximately — 

Per  cent. 

Soluble  (available)  pbospboric  acid 9 

Potasb 3 

Nitrogen 3 

then  700  jKrands  per  acre  of  such  a  fertilizer  would  be  approximately 
the  maximum  amount  that  could  judiciously  and  profitably  be  used, 
under  ordinary  circumstances,  upon  soil  in  good  condition. 

(13)  The  concentrated  fertilizer  should  be  applied  in  the  drill  (not 
broadcast)  at  a  depth  of  not  more  than  3  inches,  and  well  mixed  with 
the  soil. 

(11)  All  things  considered,  it  is  perhaps  best  in  most  cases  to  apply 
all  the  concentrated  fertilizer  in  one  application  at  the  time  of  plant- 
ing. With  lands  in  superior  condition,  however,  or  where  large  quan- 
tities of  fertilizers  are  used,  it  is  probably  profitable  to  apply  half  at 
planting  and  half  at  the  second  plowing. 

These  conclusions,  it  is  believed,  are  justified  by  the  present  state  of 
knowledge  on  the  subject  of  the  fertilization  of  cotton.  They  may  be 
accepted  provisionally  and  until  modified  and  corrected  by  the  results 
of  further  investigations  and  experiments,  such  as  are  now  in  progress 
at  several  of  the  experiment  stations  in  the  Southern  States.  In  view 
of  the  importance  of  the  subject  and  the  unsatisfactory  state  of  knowl- 
edge concerning  it,  the  writer  ventures  to  suggest  that  it  would  prob- 
ably be  wise  for  some  one  of  the  stations  of  the  cotton  States  to  devote 
a  large  part  of  its  time  and  resources  to  an  extensive,  thorough,  and 
intimate  study  of  the  nutrition,  growth,  and  development  of  the  cotton 
1993— No.  33 13 


194  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

plant.  It  is  perhaps  not  hazardous  to  conjecture  that  the  results  of 
such  study  might  modify  materially  the  apparent  conclusions  thus  far 
reached  on  the  subject  of  the  fertilization  of  cotton. 

METHODS   OF   MANURING   COTTON   AT    PRESENT    IN   GENERAL   USE   IN 

THE    UNITED    STATES. 

The  method  of  fertilizing  for  cotton  at  present  employed  by  t\ie 
Southern  cotton  grower  varies  somewhat  with  differences  in  soil,  climate, 
capital,  etc.  The  greatest  variation,  perhaps,  is  in  the  preliminary 
preparation  of  the  land.  Some  cotton  farmers  practice  green  manur- 
ing, rotation,  composting,  etc.,  with  regularity,  others  irregularly, 
others  not  at  all.  There  is  much  greater  uniformity  observed  in  the 
use  of  concentrated  fertilizers,  although  here,  again,  there  are  wide 
differences  in  usage,  particularly  as  to  the  amount  of  fertilizer 
employed.  From  the  time  of  their  introduction  until  the  present,  the 
method  of  applying  chemical  manures  to  cotton  has  been  essentially 
uniform  and  the  same,  viz,  in  the  drill.  They  are  very  rarely  broad- 
casted. Neither,  indeed,  as  a  rule,  are  composts,  stable  manure,  or 
cotton  seed.  A  shallow  furrow,  varying  in  depth  from  3  to  C  inches — 
much  more  frequently  3  than  6 — is  opened  with  the  plow  and  the 
manure  applied  by  hand  (generally  through  a  tin  tube,  known  as  a 
"guano  horn,"  3  feet  long  and  2  inches  in  diameter)  or  by  a  mechanical 
"distributer,"  much  like  a  grain  drill  planter  and  capable  of  being  set 
to  deliver  fixed  and  uniform  quantities.  The  manure  is  then  "  listed" 
on,  i.  e.,  covered  with  a  thin  layer  of  soil  to  the  depth  of  1  to  3  inches. 
The  seed  are  dropped  upon  this,  either  by  hand  or  from  a  "planter," 
and  covered  with  soil  to  a  depth  usually  of  3  inches.  The  seed  are 
frequently  rolled  in  ashes,  or  sometimes  in  acid  phosphate  or  other 
fertilizer,  before  planting.  The  amount  of  fertilizer  used  per  acre 
varies  greatly.  From  as  little  as  50  pounds  to  as  much  as  1,000  pounds 
per  acre  is  used.  The  average  amount  used  by  the  very  great  majority 
of  cotton  growers  is  probably  between  175  and  200  pounds  per  acre. 
The  fertilizer  is  for  the  most  part  the  commercial  "ammoniated"  arti- 
cle, although  considerable  quantities  of  acid  phosphate  (with  or  with- 
out potash)  and  home  mixtures  of  chemicals  are  so  used.  In  the  case 
of  composts,  such  as  that  prepared  by  the  "  Furman  formula,"  for 
example,  the  amount  used  is  usually  about  400  pounds  per  acre. 

The  commercial  ammoniated  fertilizer  sold  in  the  Southern  States  at 
the  present  time  will  average  in  composition,  approximately — 

Per  cent. 

Soluble  (available)  pkospboric  acid 9 

Nitrogen 2 

Potash 2 

Acid  phosphates  range  in  content  from  12  to  15  per  cent  of  available 
phosphoric  acid,  and  are  often  given  a  small  content  of  potash,  ranging 
from  one-half  of  1  per  cent  to  2  per  cent. 


THE    MANURING   OF    COTTON.  195 

The  home  mixture  of  chemicals  is  usually  constructed  on  the  formula 
approximately — 

Pounds. 

Acid  phosphate 1,  200 

Cotton-seed  meal 600 

Kainit 200 

2,  000 
MANURING   OF   COTTON   IN   OTHER    COUNTRIES. 

Elsewhere  than  in  the  United  States  the  culture  of  cotton  is  mainly 
confined  to  the  rich  alluvial  lands,  and  a  large  proportion  of  the  crop  is 
grown  without  any  manuring  whatever ;  still  in  most  countries  some  use 
is  made  of  farm  manures.  Even  on  the  fertile  alluvial  soils  of  Egypt, 
which  are  so  abundantly  supplied  with  fertilizing  materials  by  the 
overflowing  of  the  Kile,  barnyard  manure  is  applied  to  the  extent  of  10 
to  15  tons  per  acre,  and  "  generally  speaking,  except  on  the  richest  land, 
it  is  acknowledged  by  experienced  growers  that  the  crop  repays  the 
cost  of  application." 

In  spite  of  the  fact  that  clover  is  very  generally  grown  as  a  prepara- 
tory crop  for  cotton  in  this  country,  nitrogenous  manures  as  a  rule  are 
the  most  profitable,  because  the  nitrogen  of  the  soil  is  exhausted  by 
the  large  crops  of  cotton  and  sugar  cane  which  are  grown  and  which 
return  nothing  to  the  soil,  and  is  also  dissipated  by  the  rapid  nitrifica- 
tion which  goes  on  under  the  peculiar  climatic  conditions  of  Egypt. 

"The  time  at  which  the  manure  is  applied  varies  considerably.  Some 
spread  it  over  the  land  and  plow  it  in  before  making  the  ridges.  Others 
ridge  the  land  and  spread  it  in  the  furrows,  subsequently  covering  it 
by  splitting  the  old  ridges.  Either  of  these  methods  is  suitable  and 
preferable  to  the  system  of  applying  it  after  planting,  which  is  perhaps 
more  common  than  the  other.  When  the  cotton  is  a  few  inches  above 
the  ground,  the  manure  is  either  spread  in  the  furrows  and  hand  hoed 
in,  or  a  handful  is  put  under  the  roots  of  the  young  plants.  This  latter 
method  involves  more  labor  than  any  other,  and  has  no  advantages. 
Fresh  manure  is  not  thought  so  good  as  that  which  has  been  in  the 
heap  for  two  years,  and  old  manure  is  always  used  by  the  best  growers. 

"For  the  production  of  manure,  earth  is  used  as  litter,  and  the  com- 
position of  the  resulting  manure  depends,  therefore,  to  a  considerable 
extent  on  that  of  the  earth  used.  It  contains  but  little  water,  5  or  6 
per  cent  being  an  average.  As  the  result  of  several  analyses  made  by 
Dr.  Mackenzie,  the  manure  may  be  said  to  contain :  Nitrogen  0.1  per 
cent,  phosphoric  acid  0.25  per  cent,  and  potash  1.5  per  cent. 

"Following  clover,  as  cotton  almost  invariably  does,  it  finds  except 
on  very  poor  laud  a  sufficiency  of  nitrogen,  if  the  fodder  crop  has  been 
grazed.  If  cut  and  removed,  the  case  maybe  different.  After  a  fallow 
the  land  is  generally  manured,  as  the  land  selected  for  this  purpose  is 
of  poor  quality,  and  more  benefited  by  its  application.  Ko  artificial 
fertilizers  are  applied  in  practice,  and  as  yet  no  experiments  of  a  relia- 
ble nature  have  been  made  to  ascertain  their  effect." l 

1  Foaden,  MS.  article  on  cotton  culture  in  Egypt  in  the  possession  of  this  Office. 


196  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

Tropisclie  Agrikultur,  Sender,  1857. 

The  Culture  of  Cotton,  J.  W.  Mullet,  1860. 

The  Cultivation  of  Cotton,  John  Gibbs,  1862. 

The  Cotton  Question,  W.  J.  Barbee,  1866. 

Cotton  Culture  in  1866,  N.  B.  Cloud,  U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Rpt.  1866. 

System  of  Farming,  David  Dickson,  1869. 

Cotton  from  Seed  to  Loom,  W.  B.  Dana,  1878. 

Encyclopaedia  Britannica,  9th  ed.,  Art.  Cotton. 

American  Cyclopedia,  Art.  Cotton. 

Soils  of  Cotton  States,  E.  W.  Hilgard,  10th  U.  S.  Census,  Vols.  V,  VI. 

Climatology  of  the  Cotton  Plant,  P.  H.  Mell,  U.  S.  Weather  Bureau  Bulletin  No.  8, 

1893. 
Farmers'  Bulletin  No.  14,  U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  1894. 
Numerous  agricultural  journals  published  in  the  Southern  States,  1845-1895. 

Agricultural  experiment  station  bulletins. 

Alabama  College  Sta.  Buls.  3,  4,  5,  12,  22,  23,  33,  34,  40,  42,  52,  57. 

Alabama  Cauebrake  Sta.  Buls.  4,  7, 11, 14 ;  Rpt.  1890. 

Arkansas  Sta.  Buls.  1, 18,  23;  Rpts.  1888, 1889, 1890. 

Florida  Sta.  Buls.  8, 12. 

Georgia  Sta,  Buls.  10, 11, 16,  20,  27. 

Louisiana  Sta.  Buls.  2,  7, 8, 13, 16,  21, 22,  26, 27,  29,  31. 

Mississippi  Sta.  Buls.  24,  29;  Tech.  Bui.  1 ;  Rpts.  1888, 1889, 1890, 1891, 1893. 

North  Carolina  Sta.  Buls.  65,  71,  89;  Rpts.  1881, 1882, 1885. 

South  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  2;  Rpt.  1889. 

Tennessee  Sta.  Bui.,  Vol.  IV,  No.  5. 


CULTIVATED  VARIETIES  OF  COTTON. 

By  S.  M.  Tracy,  M.  S., 
Director  of  the  Mississippi  Agricultural  Experiment  Station. 

INTRODUCTION. 

The  word  "variety"  as  used  in  this  chapter  refers  exclusively  to  the 
various  forms  and  kinds  which  are  called  "varieties"  by  cotton  plant- 
ers, and  is  not  restricted  to  the  more  marked  and  permanent  types 
which  are  recognized  by  the  botanists.  Of  botanical  varieties  there 
are  but  few,  while  of  agricultural  varieties  there  are  an  almost  infinite 
number,  and  the  names  under  which  the  agricultural  varieties  are 
known  are  many  times  greater  than  the  number  of  recognizable  forms. 

Cotton  is  a  plant  which  sports  easily,  which  responds  quickly  to  any 
differences  in  environment,  soil,  climate,  treatment,  and  fertilizers,  and 
which  can  be  greatly  modified  in  form  and  habit  in  a  very  few  succes- 
sive crops.  The  flowers  are  large  and  open,  x^ollen  is  produced  in  great 
excess  and  is  readily  scattered  by  the  lightest  breeze,  the  stigmas  are 
well  above  the  anthers,  so  cross  fertilization  is  not  only  common  but 
usual.  Seed  from  the  earlier  maturing  bolls  will  produce  plants  yield- 
ing a  longer  lint  than  will  the  seed  from  the  later  ripening  bolls  from 
the  same  plants.  Many  varieties  which  will  produce  a  long,  strong, 
and  silky  fiber  when  planted  in  rich  river  bottom  soil  soon  lose  their 
superior  qualities  when  grown  on  the  drier  and  poorer  hill  lands.  A 
variety  which  has  been  grown  for  some  years  in  the  northern  belt  of 
the  cotton  region  will  mature  its  entire  crop  at  nearly  the  same  time, 
while  if  the  same  variety  be  grown  for  a  few  years  in  the  southern  cot- 
ton belt  the  crop  will  continue  to  mature  through  several  weeks,  though 
the  total  yield  may  be  but  little  greater.  With  its  natural  tendency  to 
vary,  and  with  all  these  forces  to  stimulate  the  plant  to  a  change  of 
form  and  habit,  it  is  easy  to  see  how  varieties  maybe  multiplied  indefi- 
nitely, even  without  deliberate  action  on  the  part  of  the  cultivator. 

In  the  preparation  of  this  work  an  effort  has  been  made  to  trace  the 
origin  and  history  of  all  the  varieties  which  have  been  mentioned  in 
the  station  publications,  together  with  such  others  as  are  known  to  be 
common  in  the  cotton-growing  region  of  the  United  States  or  to  possess 
special  value.  In  many  cases  the  records  of  certain  of  these  varieties 
have  been  very  defective,  and  it  has  been  impossible  to  secure  accurate 
data  from  the  originators  themselves,  so  that  some  varieties  of  greater 
or  less  local  prominence  are  not  mentioned-  here.  We  have  found  it 
exceedingly  difficult  to  secure  exact  data  in  regard  to  both  the  percentage 

197 


198  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

of  lint  and  the  length  of  staple  from  different  varieties,  as  in  many  cases 
the  amount  of  lint  has  been  estimated  from  the  gin  yields,  which  may 
vary  greatly.  In  experiments  at  the  Alabama  Station,1  the  averages  of 
eight  gin  yields  varied  1.99  per  cent,  and  in  one  case  as  much  as  5.25  per 
cent,  when  two  gins  of  different  makes  were  used  on  the  same  varieties 
of  cotton.  The  percentage  of  lint  also  varies  with  the  season  and  the 
soil  on  which  the  crop  was  grown.  In  some  cases  the  length  of  the 
staple  has  been  accurately  measured  from  samples  taken  from  the  seed 
by  hand,  while  in  others  the  measurements  given  have  been  those  of 
the  staple  after  it  had  been  passed  through  the  gin.  In  several  cases 
where  samples  of  the  same  variety  have  been  accurately  measured  the 
length  has  been  found  to  vary  greatly,  owing  to  differences  in  soil  and 
season.  The  size,  weight,  and  color  of  the  seed  appear  to  be  of  less 
value  in  the  identification,  of  varieties  than  has  generally  been  sup- 
posed, as  either  or  all  of  these  may  vary  with  differences  of  soil  and 
with  the  individual  plants  from  which  they  have  been  taken. 

When  inconsistencies  have  been  found  in  the  published  descriptions 
of  any  variety,  it  has  usually  been  possible  to  account  for  them,  and  to 
make  due  allowances.  Eecords  which  have  been  extreme  and  evidently 
faulty  have  been  ignored,  so  that  the  yields  and  measurements  given 
here  are  the  averages  of  records  which  are  apparently  reliable.  It  is 
useless  to  attempt  giving  exact  characters  to  such  variable  plants,  but 
fortunately  nearly  all  of  the  varieties  mentioned  in  this  chapter  have 
been  frequently  described,  and  nearly  all  of  them  have  been  grown  two 
or  more  years  under  the  personal  supervision  of  the  writer.  In  pre- 
paring the  following  descriptions  it  has  been  the  aim  to  give  the  general 
habit  and  product  of  each  variety,  avoiding  both  the  highest  and  the 
lowest  extremes : 

AMERICAN   VARIETIES. 

Acme  (Allen  Acme). — From  C.  B.  Allen,  Nanachehaw,  Miss.  Evi- 
dently a  mixture  of  some  long-staple  variety  and  Sea  Island.  It  is 
not  a  hybrid,  and  does  not  seem  to  have  any  special  value. 

Allen  (Allen  Silk,  Allen  Long  Staple,  Talbot). — Originated  by  J.  B. 
Allen,  Port  Gibson,  Miss.  Plant  vigorous,  pyramidal,  long  limbed; 
bolls  large,  round,  opening  very  widely,  and  sometimes  allowing  the 
seed  cotton  to  drop;  maturing  late;  lint  28  to  30  percent;  staple  30 
to  35  mm.,  fine  and  silky.  This,  like  the  Cook,  is  easily  affected  by  a 
change  of  soil  or  climate,  and  produces  a  longer  and  better  staple  when 
grown  in  the  Yazoo  Delta  than  elsewhere. 

Aired. — History  unknown,  but  evidently  of  the  Eio  Grande  type. 
Reported  only  once,  from  Mississippi. 

Alvarado. — History  unknown;  appears  to  be  Peterkin.  Eeported 
only  once,  from  Georgia. 

Audrey  Peterkin.     (See  PeterMn.) 

i  Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  33. 


CULTIVATED  VARIETIES  OF  COTTON.  199 

Bahama.     (See  Texas  Storm  Proof.) 

Bailey. — Originated  by  T.  J.  King,  Louisburg,  X.  0.  Plant  of  medium 
size,  early  and  prolific  for  a  long-staple  variety;  lint 28  to  30  per  cent; 
staple  2S  to  32  mm.    An  excellent  long-staple  variety  for  uplands. 

Banana  (Cluster,  Hogan,  Prout). — Newspaper  writers  of  1848  to  1850 
mention  these  as  being  identical,  but  give  no  description  further  than 
that  the  bolls  were  in  clusters  and  that  the  seed  cotton  yielded  about 

31  per  cent  of  lint.  The  variety  seems  to  have  been  discarded  many 
years  ago. 

Bancroft  Herlong.     (See  Herlong.) 

Bancroft  Prolific  Long  Staple. — Origin  unknown;  advertised  by  a 
Georgia  seedsman  in  1892,  and  planted  at  the  Louisiana  Station,  where 
its  yield  was  much  below  the  average. 

Bancroft  Prolific  Herlong.     (See  Herlong.) 

Barnes. — One  of  the  older  varieties.  Plant  vigorous,  short  limbed, 
and  inclining  to  cluster,  similar  to  Herlong  in  habit ;  bolls  above  medium 
size,  maturing  late.     Probably  not  now  in  cultivation. 

Barnett. — From  Alabama;  origin  unknown.  Plant  tall  and  slender; 
limbs  short;  bolls  medium  size,  rounded,  not  maturing  early;  lint  30  to 

32  per  cent,  staple  23  to  25  mm.     Beported  only  from  Alabama. 
Bates  Big  Boll. — Originated  by  B.  Bates,  Jackson  Station,  S.  C,  who 

developed  it  by  repeated  selections  of  choice  plants  belonging  to  the 
Bio  Grande  type.  Plant  vigorous,  very  symmetrical,  well  branched; 
bolls  rather  large,  not  maturing  early;  lint  33  to  35  per  cent,  staple  21 
to  27  mm.  In  1892  this  gave  the  largest  yield  of  any  of  the  25  varieties 
grown  at  the  Georgia  Station,  and  in  1893  ranked  fifth  among  26  varie- 
ties grown  at  the  Mississippi  Station. 

Bates  Favorite. — Of  the  same  origin  as  Bates  Big  Boll.  Plant  very 
vigorous,  branching  widely;  bolls  medium  size,  maturing  late;  lint  30 
to  32  per  cent,  staple  24  to  27  mm. 

Belle  Creole. — The  immediate  ancestor  of  the  Jethro  and  described 
by  Col.  H.  W.  Vick,  of  Vicusburg,  Miss.,  as  follows:  " Stalk  large,  tall, 
and  productive;  boll  large  and  long;  seed  commonly  flat  on  one  side 
with  an  indentation;  lint  abundant,  long,  firm,  silky,  soft,  lustrous,  and 
beyond  measure  more  oily  than  any  cotton  I  have  seen." 

Ben  Smith  (Ben  Smith  Choice,  Bush,  Smith  Standard).— From  B.  F. 
Smith,  Bedwine,  La.  Plant  strong,  widely  pyramidal;  bolls  medium 
size,  usually  2  at  each  joint,  not  maturing  early;  lint  32  to  33  per 
cent,  staple  23  to  20  mm.  This  was  grown  in  Alabama  and  Georgia 
many  years  ago  under  the  name  of  "Bush,"'  and  is  probably  descended 
from  the  Purple  Stalk  or  Bed  Leaf,  which  was  common  in  those  States 
from  1845  to  1850. 

Big  Boll — From  California;  history  unknown,  but  supposed  to  be  of 
Texan  origin.  Plant  medium  size;  limbs  rather  long;  bolls  large, 
oblong,  maturing  late;  lint  34  to  35  per  cent,  staple  25  to  28  mm. 

Black  Seed. — A  name  applied  both  to  Sea  Island  varieties  and  to 
upland  varieties  having  a  smooth  seed. 


200  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Bob,  Bob  Silk,  Bob  White.    (See  Osier.) 

Bolivar  County. — A  Louisiana  variety  of  the  Storm  Proof  type, 
maturing  early,  with  29  to  30  per  cent  of  lint. 

Borden  Prolific. — Mentioned  in  South  Carolina  reports,  but  no 
descriptions  are  given. 

Boyd  Prolific. — One  of  the  oldest  of  the  improved  varieties,  having 
been  common  in  Mississippi  in  1847,  and  is  the  parent  stock  of  many 
cluster  varieties  of  recent  introduction.  The  originator,  Mr.  Boyd, 
said  that  it  was  grown  from  a  single  plant  found  in  a  field  of  "common" 
cotton.  Plant  upright,  slender,  moderately  vigorous,  short  limbed; 
bolls  small,  round,  in  clusters,  medium  in  time  of  ripening;  lint  30  to 
32  per  cent,  staple  20  to  24  mm. 

Brady. — Mentioned  in  the  report  of  the  North  Carolina  Station  for 
1887,  but  no  description  given. 

Bwgg  Long  Staple. — Prom  T.  J.  King,  Louisburg,  1ST.  C.  This  has 
every  appearance  of  being  a  true  hybrid  between  Gossypium  herbaceum 
and  Gossypiuni  barbadense,  but  as  it  was  grown  from  a  single  stalk 
found  in  the  field  of  an  ignorant  negro  its  parentage  is  unknown. 
Plant  very  vigorous,  well  branched;  bolls  large,  oblong,  maturing  late; 
lint  about  30  per  cent,  and  the  staple  extremely  variable  in  length,  the 
bulk  of  the  fibers  being  only  about  35  mm.,  while  a  few — perhaps  5 
per  cent  of  those  in  each  boll — reach  a  length  of  fully  75  mm.  Owing 
to  its  mixed  character  the  staple  is  classed  commercially  as  "  short." 

Brannon  (Little  Brannon). — One  of  the  older  varieties,  originating 
in  Texas  many  years  ago.  Plant  medium  in  growth,  well  branched; 
limbs  short  jointed;  bolls  small,  medium  in  time  of  ripening;  lint  32  to 
35  per  cent,  staple  18  to  22  mm.     Belongs  to  the  Rio  Grande  type. 

Brazier  Peterkin.     (See  Peterkin.) 

Brooks  Improved. — A  local  Louisiana  variety,  maturing  early,  with 
31  to  33  per  cent  of  lint  and  a  short  staple. 

Brown. — Originated  in  Copiah  County,  Miss.,  prior  to  1848,  and  said 
to  have  been  developed  by  selections  from  the  Sugar  Loaf,  an  early 
maturing,  short- staple  variety. 

Bush.     (See  Ben  Smith.) 

Carolina  Pride.     (See  Early  Carolina.) 

Catacaos.     (See  Peruvian.) 

Catawba. — From  W.  R.  Davis,  Landsford,  S.  C.  A  local  variety, 
maturing  late,  with  35  to  3G  per  cent  of  lint  and  staple  23  to  25  mm. 
Apparently  from  the  Peterkin. 

Chambers. — A  South  Carolina  variety  of  unknown  origin,  yielding  31 
to  32  per  cent  of  lint,  with  a  staple  22  to  25  mm.  Belongs  to  the  Her- 
long  type. 

Champion  Cluster. — Plant  very  vigorous,  with  long  limbs;  bolls  large, 
oblong,  maturing  late;  lint  30  to  31  percent;  staple  25  to  28  mm.  This 
name  is  misleading,  as  the  variety  does  not  belong  to  the  cluster  type, 
but  is  much  more  like  the  Mammoth  Prolific. 


CULTIVATED  VARIETIES  OF  COTTON.  201 

Cherry  Cluster  (Cherry). — Originated  in  South  Carolina.  Plant  of 
medium  growth,  cone  shaped;  limbs  of  medium  length;  bolls  small, 
round,  clustered,  maturing  early;  lint  30  to  32  per  cent;  staple  18  to 
22  mm.    Belongs  to  the  same  type  as  the  Dickson. 

Cherry  Long  Staple  Prolific. — Nearly,  if  not  quite,  identical  with 
Cherry  Cluster.     Originated  in  the  same  locality. 

Cluster.     (See  Banana.) 

Cobweb  (Spider  Web). — Originated  in  18S1  by  W.  E.  Collins,  Mayers- 
ville,  Miss.,  and  claimed  to  be  hybrid  between  Peeler  and  an  Egyptian 
variety  of  Gossypium  barbadensc.  Plant  very  vigorous,  long  limbed; 
bolls  large,  somewhat  pointed,  maturing  late;  lint  28  to  29  per  cent; 
staple  35  to  40  mm.,  very  fine  and  silky. 

Cochran  (Cochran  Extra  Prolific,  Cochran  Short  Limbed  Prolific). — 
Originated  in  Georgia  by  selections  from  Peerless  stock.  Plant 
a  moderate  grower,  slender,  short  limbed;  bolls  medium  size,  round; 
lint  32  to  33  per  cent;  staple  35  to  40  mm.  Differs  but  little  from  the 
Peerless. 

Colthorp  Eureka.     (See  Eureka.) 

Colthorp  Prickle. — The  name  apparently  a  mistake  for  Colthorp 
Pride. 

Colthorp  Pride. — From  A.  S.  Colthorp,  Milliken  Bend,  La.  Originally 
grown  from  a  few  seeds  picked  up  from  the  floor  of  a  country  store. 
Plant  vigorous,  upright,  pyramidal;  bolls  large,  oval,  maturing  late; 
lint  28  to  30  per  cent;  staple  28  to  32  mm.,  fine  and  silky;  seed  small 
and  many  of  them  black.     Prolific  for  a  long-staple  variety. 

Cook. — Originated  by  W.  A.  Cook,  of  Newman,  Miss.,  from  a  single 
stalk  found  in  a  field  of  "  common"  cotton  in  1884.  Plant  very  vigor- 
ous and  prolific;  limbs  irregular,  not  long;  bolls  large  and  long,  some- 
times 24  inches  in  length,  maturing  late;  lint  26  to  28  per  cent;  staple 
35  to  40  mm.  Similar  to  the  Allen,  and  one  of  the  best  varieties  for 
rich,  low  ground. 

Cox  Royal  Arch  Silk. — A  local  variety  from  Georgia,  similar  to  the 
Ozier  Silk. 

Crawford  Peerless  (Crawford  Premium). — From  J.  M.  Crawford,  Colum- 
bia, S.  C.  Developed  by  selections  from  the  Peerless,  and  practically 
identical  with  that  variety  except  that  the  bolls  are  usually  clustered. 

Crossland.     (See  Peterkin.) 

Dalkeith  Eureka.     (See  Eureka.) 

Dean. — A  local  South  Carolina  variety. 

Bearing  (Dearing  Prolific,  Dearing  Small  Seed). — Very  similar  to 
Herlong.  The  Southern  Live  Stock  Journal  (1887)1  gives  an  inter 
view  with  Dr.  J.  J.  Dearing,  Columbus,  Ga.,  presumably  the  originator 
or  disseminator  of  this  variety.  The  writer  claims  to  have  made  all  his 
selections  through  a  number  of  years  with  special  reference  to  the  per 
cent  of  lint,  and  claims  to  have  attained  finally  45.28  per  cent  of  lint 
"under  the  test  of  Prof.  H.  C.  White,  State  chemist  of  Georgia." 


lU.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Library  ScrapLook,  Cotton  and  Sugar,  pp.  2,  3. 


202  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Diamond. — Another  of  the  varieties  originated  by  Col.  II.  W.  Vick; 
of  the  Bio  Grande  type,  and  differing  very  slightly  from  that  form. 

Dickson  (Dixon,  Dickson  Cluster,  Dickson  Improved,  Simpson). — 
Mr.  Capers  Dickson,  of  Oxford,  (la.,  writes  that  this  "  was  originated 
in  this  place  in  1857  or  1858  by  my  father,  Mr.  David  Dickson,  and  was 
developed  from  Boyd  Prolific  cotton  by  several  successive  years  selec- 
tions from  the  seed  of  that  variety.  ~No  crossing  was  practiced,  and 
the  variety  was  entirely  the  result  of  careful  selections  each  year.  The 
variety  has  ever  since  been  kept  up  in  the  same  way."  Plants  vigor- 
ous, well  branched,  pyramidal;  limbs  short;  bolls  medium  to  large, 
round,  clustered,  maturing  rather  early;  lint  31  to  32  per  cent;  staple 
23  to  20  mm.     One  of  the  most  popular  cluster  varieties. 

Drake  Cluster. — Originated  in  1882  by  It.  W.  Drake,  of  Greensboro, 
Ala.,  and  was  developed  from  the  Peerless  "by  selecting  the  earli- 
est.and  best  matured  bolls  from  the  earliest  and  most  prolific  plants." 
It  resembles  Peerless  in  every  way  excepting  that  it  matures  some- 
what earlier  and  the  bolls  are  more  clustered.  Lint  31  to  33  per  cent, 
staple  22  to  25  mm.     One  of  the  most  popular  varieties  for  Uplands. 

Drought  Proof.     (See  Texas  Storm  Proof.) 

Duncan  (Duncan  Mammoth). — From  F.  M.  Duncan,  Dallas,  Ga.  A 
late-ripening,  large-boll,  long-staple  variety,  similar  to  Mammoth 
Prolific. 

Early  Carolina  (Extra  Early  Carolina,  Carolina  Pride,  South  Caro- 
lina Pride). — An  early  ripening  variety  which  has  been  developed  by 
selections  from  the  Dickson   and  which  is  very  similar  to  that  form. 

East  (East  Improved  Georgia). — A  long-staple  variety  similar  to  the 
Allen,  but  maturing  a  little  earlier  and  having  a  little  shorter  staple. 
Lint  31  to  32  per  cent. 

Ellsworth.— Prom  W.  H".  Ellsworth,  Wallace,  K  C.  Plant  usually 
with  long  and  spreading  limbs;  bolls  large,  oblono-,  maturing  late; 
lint  30  to  33  per  cent,  staple  21  to  21  mm.  This  is  exceedingly  variable 
in  its  habit  of  growth  and  in  the  character  of  its  lint.  Apparently  a 
mixture  of  two  or  three  varieties. 

Ethridge. — From  W.  B.  Ethridge,  Downsville,  La.  Grown  from  a 
single  plant  found  in  a  field  of  some  other  variety.  Plant  of  fair  size; 
limbs  long  and  spreading;  maturing  late;  staple  fine  and  silky,  28  to 
30  mm. ;  seed  black. 

Eureka  (Colthorp  Eureka,  Dalkeith  Eureka,  Humphrey  Eureka). — 
Originated  from  a  single  stalk  found  on  a  Louisiana  plantation  many 
years  ago,  and  for  some  time  was  called  Mand  Atkins.  The  plant  is 
very  vigorous  and  prolific;  limbs  of  medium  length;  bolls  rather  large, 
oblong,  not  maturing  earl}',  holding  the  seed  well  in  wet  weather;  lint 
28  to  30  per  cent,  staple  35  to  40  mm.,  very  fine,  strong,  and  silky;  seed 
quite  small  and  sometimes  black.  One  of  the  most  popular  long-staple 
varieties. 


CULTIVATED    VAEIETIES    OF    COTTON.  203 

Excelsior. — Originated  in  1883  by  C.  R.  Ezell,  Eatonton,  Ga.,by  selec- 
tions from  the  New  Era.  Similar  to  the  Peterkin,  though  "with  bolls 
a  trifle  larger.     Lint  33  to  35  per  cent,  staple  26  to  30  mm. 

Farrar  Forked  Leaf.     (See  OTcra.) 

Ferrell  Prolific. — From  C.  B.  Ferrell,  Montgomery,  Ala.  Plant  me- 
dium size,  with  very  long  and  straggling  limbs ;  very  prolific ;  bolls 
large,  oblong;  lint  28  to  30  per  cent,  staple  30  to  35  mm.  Similar  to 
Mammoth  Prolific. 

Georgia  Prolific  (Georgia  Upland). — Names  which  are  applied  to  a 
number  of  upland  short-staple  varieties  of  the  Peterkin  and  Herlong 
types. 

Garuer. — A  local  Alabama  variety  of  the  Eio  Grande  type- 
Gold  Dust.     (See  King.) 

Grayson  Early  Prolific. — From  W.  B.  Grayson,  Grayson,  La.  Plant 
medium  in  size;  limbs  short,  not  spreading  widely;  very  prolific; 
bolls  medium  in  size,  somewhat  clustered,  ripening  early;  lint  34  to  36 
per  cent,  staple  22  to  25  mm.    Resembles  Peterkin,  but  matures  earlier. 

Griffin. — This  remarkable  variety  was  originated  by  John  Griffin,  of 
Greenville,  Miss.,  who  developed  it  by  repeated  and  persistent  selec- 
tions from  some  unknown  long-staple  variety.  Plant  vigorous,  with  a 
pale-green  leaf,  prolific;  bolls  large,  medium  in  time  of  maturing;  lint 
28  to  29  per  cent,  staple  very  fine  aud  silky,  occasional  fibers  70  to  75 
mm.    The  longest  and  finest  staple  we  have  found. 

Gunn. — From  C.  L.  Gunn,  Temple,  Miss.  A  local  variety  which  does 
not  differ  materially  from  the  Rio  Grande  type. 

Hawkins  (Hawkins  Extra  Prolific). — Originated  by  B.  W.  Hawkins, 
Nona,  Ga.,  from  a  single  stalk  in  a  field  where  mixed  seed  of  Boyd 
Prolific,  Herlong,  and  New  Era  had  been  planted.  From  the  prod- 
uct of  this  plant  repeated  selections  were  made,  until  the  variety  had 
assumed  a  fairly  constant  form.  The  plants  are  very  vigorous,  well 
branched,  pyramidal,  prolific;  bolls  medium  in  size,  roundish,  medium 
or  early  iu  time  of  maturing;  lint  32  to  34  per  cent,  staple  18  to  22  mm. 

Mays  China. — From  J.  W.  Hays,  Hays  Landing,  Miss.  Very  similar 
to  the  Allen,  and  perhaps  the  same. 

Herlong  (Bancroft  Herlong,  Jones  Herlong,  etc.). — From  E.  Bancroft, 
Athens,  Ga.  Plant  medium  in  size,  well  branched,  pyramidal,  very 
prolific;  bolls  medium  in  size,  round,  maturing  rather  late;  lint  30  to 
32  per  cent,  staple  20  to  25  mm.  A  semicluster  variety,  very  popular 
in  Georgia  and  Alabama.  This  name  is  sometimes  incorrectly  applied 
to  a  long-staple  variety. 

Hightower. — A  local  Alabama  variety,  strong  growing,  bolls  very 
large,  and  staple  of  medium  length. 

Hilliard. — From  W.  A.  Hilliard,  Bowersville,  Ga.  Of  the  Rio  Grande 
type,  and  not  differing  essentially  from  Peterkin. 

Hogan.     (See  Banana.) 


204  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Hollingshead. — One  of  the  oldest  varieties  of  which  we  have  any 
record,  it  having  been  grown  in  the  Oarolinas  in  1818,  It  was  sup- 
posed to  be  of  Mexican  origin,  and  seems  now  to  have  disappeared. 

Howell. — A  local  Louisiana  variety,  very  similar  to  Peterkin,  but 
perhaps  a  little  earlier  in  maturing. 

Humphrey  Eureka.     (See  Eurelca.) 

Hunnicutt  (Hunnicutt  Choice). — Originated  by  Prof.  J.  B.  Hunnicutt, 
Athens,  Ga.,  who  developed  it  by  mixing  seed  of  Bates,  Boyd  Pro- 
lific, Herlong,  Truitt,  and  other  varieties,  and  planting  them  in  the 
same  field.  From  the  product  oi"  these  seeds  stalks  approaching 
nearest  the  originator's  ideal  form  were  selected  for  further  similar 
selections  which  were  continued  through  several  years.  The  plant  is 
large  and  well  branched,  branches  spreading,  prolific;  bolls  of  medium 
size,  roundish,  maturing  early;  lint  30  to  32  per  cent,  staple  22  to 
25  mm. 

Improved  Long  Staple.     (See  Jones  Long  Staple.) 

Improved  Prolific. — From  A.  Borden,  Goldsboro,  ET.  C.  A  local 
variety,  differing  but  little  from  the  Herlong. 

J.  0.  Cool\ — Evidently  a  descendant  of  the  old  Purple  Stalk  type, 
and  apparently  identical  with  the  Ben  Smith. 

Jenkins  (Jenkins  Poor  Man's  Friend). — Originated  by  J.  F.  Jenkins, 
Natchez,  Miss.,  by  repeated  selections  from  Brannon.  Plant  strong, 
pyramidal,  prolific;  bolls  medium  in  size,  oval,  maturing  early;  lint 
34  to  36  per  cent,  staple  22  to  25  mm.  One  of  the  best  of  the  Rio 
Grande  type. 

Jethro  (McBride  Silk).— Originated  by  Col.  H.  W.  Vick,  of  Vicksburg, 
Miss.,  between  1830  and  1840,  by  selections  from  the  Belle  Creole,  and 
sent  to  J.  V.  Jones,  of  Herndon,  Ga.,  in  184G,  with  a  request  that  it  be 
called  by  its  present  name.  We  have  been  unable  to  find  any  descrip- 
tion of  this  variety  and  can  not  learn  that  it  is  now  in  cultivation.  It 
is  the  parent  stock  of  Jones  Long  Staple,  Six  Oaks,  and  a  number  of 
other  similar  varieties. 

Jones  Herlong.     (See  Herlong.) 

Jones  Improved  (Jones  Improved  Prolific). — Plant  of  medium  size, 
limbs  short  and  spreading,  not  very  prolific;  bolls  large,  roundish, 
maturing  late;  lint  30  to  32  per  cent,  staple  20  to  24  mm. 

Jones  Long  Staple  (Improved  Long  Staple,  Bichardson  Improved). — 
Originated  by  J.  H.  Jones,  Herndon,  Ga.  Plant  large;  limbs  long  and 
spreading,  prolific;  boils  large,  oval,  pointed,  maturing  medium  or  late; 
lint  29  to  30  per  cent,  staple  30  to  34  mm.  One  of  the  many  descendants 
of  the  Jethro,  and  one  of  the  most  popular  long- staple  varieties  for 
the  middle  and  southern  parts  of  the  cotton-growing  region. 

Jones  No,  1. — A  local  Alabama  variety  of  the  Eio  Grande  type,  pro- 
ducing 33  to  34  per  cent  of  lint,  with  a  staple  18  to  22  mm. 

lowers  (Jowers  Improved). — Very  similar  to  Peterkin,  and  probably 
the  same. 


CULTIVATED  VARIETIES  OF  COTTON.  205 

Jumbo. — Originated  by  B.  W.  Hawkins,  ISTona,  Ga.,  by  selections  from 
the  Hawkins,  and  similar  to  that  variety,  though  more  prolific. 

Kelly.     (See  Marston.) 

Kieth. — From  Alabama.  Plant  tall,  pyramidal;  limbs  short  jointed, 
prolific;  bolls  medium  in  size,  roundish,  not  clustered,  maturing  early; 
lint  30  to  32  per  cent,  staple  24  to  27  mm. 

King  (Gold  Dust,  King  Improved,  Tennessee  Gold  Dust). — Originated 
by  T.  J.  King,  Louisburg,  X.  C.  Plant  of  medium  size,  pyramidal,  well 
branched,  very  prolific;  bolls  small,  roundish,  all  maturing  early;  lint 
32  to  34  per  cent,  staple  25  to  28  m«i. ;  seeds  small.  The  fact  that  this 
variety  matures  its  entire  crop  very  early  makes  it  one  of  the  most 
desirable  sorts  for  the  northern  cotton  belt. 

Lewis  Prolific.     (See  Sugar  Loaf.) 

Little  Brannon.     (See  Brannon.) 

Louisiana. — A  name  which,  like  the  Georgia  Prolific,  is  applied  to 
a  large  number  of  upland  short-staple  varieties. 

Magruder  Marvel. — Originated  by  I.  D.  Magruder,  Eussum,  Miss.,  and 
is  a  cross  secured  by  fertilizing  the  flowers  of  Barnes  Cluster  with 
pollen  from  Golden  Prolific.  Plant  pyramidal;  limbs  abundant  and 
short  jointed;  bolls  small,  round,  somewhat  clustered,  maturing  early 
for  a  cluster  variety;  lint  31  to  33  per  cent,  staple  25  to  30  mm. 

Magruder  XL. — Originated  by  I.  D.  Magruder  and  secured  by  ferti- 
lizing Peterkin  with  pollen  from  the  Allen,  and  in  the  after  fixation 
of  the  type  by  keeping  the  selection  of  plants  for  seed  as  near  as  possi- 
ble to  the  Peterkin  in  production  and  habit,  and  at  the  same  time 
preserving  the  longer  staple  secured  from  the  Allen.  Early  and  pro- 
lific; lint  32  to  34  per  cent,  staple  25  to  30  mm. 

Mallius  Prolific. — A  local  Louisiana  variety. 

Mammoth  Cluster. — From  Georgia.  One  of  the  older  varieties  and 
of  unknown  origin.     Quite  similar  to  Champion  Cluster. 

Mammoth  Prolific. — Another  Georgia  variety  of  unknown  origin. 
Plant  very  strong,  well  branched,  not  very  prolific;  bolls  very  large, 
oblong,  maturing  very  late;  lint  30  to  32  per  cent,  staple  26  to  30  mm. 
Yery  similar  to  Duncan,  and  perhaps  the  same. 

Marston  (Kelly). — From  Louisiana.  Plant  of  medium  growth;  limbs 
short,  prolific;  bolls  fair  size,  round,  maturing  late;  lint  30  to  31  per 
cent,  staple  26  to  30  mm. 

Martin  Prolific. — A  Louisiana  variety,  and  apparently  the  same  as 
Marston. 

Mastodon. — This  name  occurs  in  a  list  of  the  varieties  grown  in  Mis- 
sissippi in  1850,  but  no  description  is  given,  and  the  variety  seems  to 
have  disappeared. 

Matthews. — From  J.  A.  Matthews,  Holly  Springs,  Miss.,  who  saved 
the  seed  from  a  stray  plant  found  in  his  garden.  Plant  very  vigorous, 
pyramidal,  with  limbs  from  near  the  ground;  limbs  short  jointed,  very 
prolific;  bolls  large,  ovate,  pointed,  maturing  early;  lint  29  to  30  per 


206  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

cent,  staple  35  to  40  mm.  This  has  given  remarkably  good  yields  for 
a  long-staple  variety  in  the  northern  cotton  belt. 

Mattis. — From  0.  F.  Mattis,  Learned,  Miss.  Developed  by  repeated 
selections  from  some  unknown  variety.  Plant  vigorous;  limbs  long, 
short  jointed,  prolific;  bolls  clustered,  medium  in  size,  maturing  rather 
late;  lint  30  to  32  per  cent,  staple  25  to  30  mm. 

Maxey  (S.  B.  Maxey,  Meyers,  Meyers  Texas). — Of  unknown  origin, 
but  introduced  in  Texas  by  Hon.  S.  B.  Maxey.  Plants  medium  in  size, 
well  branched,  prolific;  bolls  large,  roundish;  lint  31  to  32  per  cent, 
staple  30  to  35  mm.  Esteemed  more  highly  on  bottom  lands  than  on 
uplands. 

McAllister  Peerless.     (See  Peerless.) 

McBride.     (See  Jethro.) 

McCall. — A  variety  which  was  somewhat  popular  in  South  Carolina 
about  18S0,  but  which  seems  now  to  have  been  dropped.  It  belonged 
to  the  same  group  as  Truitt  and  other  similar  varieties. 

Mclver, — A  local  South  Carolina  variety  similar  to  McCall. 

Mexican. — One  of  the  oldest  known  varieties,  having  been  brought 
from  the  City  of  Mexico  to  Natchez,  Miss.,  by  Walter  Burling  in  1800, 
and  introduced  in  South  Carolina  as  early  as  1816.  It  was  from  this 
stock  that  by  far  the  larger  proportion  of  our  short  and  medium  staple 
varieties  have  been  developed. 

Mexican  Burr. — An  old  name  for  the  varieties  of  "Mexican"  which 
produced  bolls  in  clusters,  and  the  original  source  of  many  of  the  pres- 
ent cluster  varieties. 

Meyers.     (See  Maxey.) 

Minter  (Minter  Prolific). — From  J.  E.  Minter,  Laurens,  S.  C.  Origi- 
nated about  1870  by  selections  from  some  unknown  variety.  Plants 
large,  branching  low  and  widely,  prolific;  bolls  medium  in  size,  round 
or  oval,  maturing  late;  lint  30  to  32  per  cent,  staple  22  to  25  mm. 
Quite  similar  to  Herlong. 

Moina. — Originated  by  J.  M.  Taylor,  of  North  Carolina,  about  1873, 
and  described  as  follows:  "This  variety  is  remarkable  for  the  number 
of  its  limbs,  but  they  grow  too  long  and  slender.  Its  fiber,  in  length 
and  fineness,  is  said  to  surpass  the  Peeler.  It  bears  bolls  abun- 
dantly, but  is  troublesome  to  pick  and  gin,  so  that  its  culture  is  gener- 
ally abandoned  in  this  section." 

Money  Bush. — Mentioned  as  one  of  the  varieties  growing  in  Missis- 
sippi in  1850,  and  probably  the  same  as  Banana. 

Moon. — From  J.  Moon,  Peytonville,  Ark.  Originated  about  1875 
from  a  single  plant  showing  unusually  good  staple.  Plant  strong; 
limbs  long  and  spreading;  bolls  large,  oval,  medium  in  time  of  matur- 
ing; lint  31  to  33  per  cent,  staple  very  strong  and  silky,  30  to  35  mm. 

Multibolus. — This  was  grown  in  Mississippi  in  1849,  and  some- 
times called  "Sugar  Loaf."  It  was  a  cluster  variety  which  has  now 
disappeared. 


CULTIVATED  VARIETIES  OF  COTTON.  207 

Multifiora. — Grown  in  Alabama  in  1849,  and  said  to  be  similar  to  tlie 
Banana,  but  with  larger  clusters  of  bolls  and  lighter-colored  seeds. 

Oats. — Grown  and  named  at  the  Louisiana  Station  from  seed  of  an 
unknown  variety  purchased  at  a  public  gin  in  1889.  Plant  vigorous, 
sugar  loaf  in  shape,  very  prolific,  maturing  early ;  lint  32  to  31  per 
cent;  staple  20  to  25  mm.     Perhaps  the  same  as  King. 

Okra  (Okra  Leaf,  Farrar  Forked  Leaf). — One  of  the  older  varieties, 
and  mentioned  by  Southern  writers  as  early  as  1837,  when  it  was  quite 
common  and  somewhat  popular,  but  it  soon  disappeared  from  general 
cultivation.  About  1870,  C.  A.  Alexander,  of  Washington,  Ga.,  found 
a  single  stalk  in  his  field,  and  from  its  product  the  variety  was  again 
disseminated  quite  widely  from  1885  to  1890,  but  its  culture  seems  less 
general  now  than  five  years  ago.  The  plant  is  of  medium  growth; 
limbs  short  and  upright;  leaves  with  very  narrow  lobes;  bolls  clus- 
tered, small,  round,  maturing  early;  lint  32  to  31  per  cent;  staple  21 
to  20  mm.  The  small  amount  of  foliage  produced  by  this  variety  is  said 
to  preserve  it  from  attacks  by  worms  and  to  hasten  the  complete 
maturity  of  the  crop  in  wet  seasons. 

Ozier  (Ozier  Silk,  Bob,  Bob  Silk,  Bob  White,  Tennessee  Silk). — From 
J.  D.  Ozier,  Corinth,  Miss.  Plants  medium  size,  pyramidal;  limbs 
rather  short,  moderately  prolific ;  bolls  medium  in  size,  oval,  ripening 
early;  lint  30  to  32  per  cent;  staple  25  to  28  mm.  Quite  popular  from 
1880  to  1890,  but  less  so  now. 

Pearce. — Introduced  by  T.  J.  King  in  1887,  and  described  as  an  early 
maturing  sort,  producing  32  to  33  per  cent  of  lint,  but  does  not  appear 
to  have  been  widely  disseminated. 

Peeler. — Originated  in  Warren  County,  Miss.,  about  1864.  Plant 
very  large  and  vigorous,  branching  widely;  bolls  large,  maturing  late; 
lint  30  to  32  per  cent;  staple  very  strong  and  silky,  25  to  28  mm.  One 
of  the  most  widely  cultivated  varieties. 

Peerless  (Crawford  Premium,  Crawford  Peerless,  McAllister  Peerless, 
Sutton  Peerless,  The  Premium). — Probably  of  Georgia  origin.  Plant 
medium,  well  branched,  pyramidal;  bolls  small  or  medium  in  size, 
round,  sometimes  clustered,  maturing  early;  lint  32  to  33  per  cent; 
staple  23  to  27  mm.     One  of  the  best  of  the  upland  varieties. 

Peruvian  (Catacaos). — A  South  American  variety  of  Gossypium  arbo- 
reum,  which  never  matures  fruit  in  the  LTnited  States. 

Peterkin  (Audrey  Peterkin,  Brazier  Peterkin,  Crosslaud,  Texas  Wood, 
Wise).— Originated  by  J.  A.  Peterkin,  Fort  Motte,  S.  C,  about  1870. 
Originally  a  variety  with  smooth,  black  seeds,  and  producing  nearly  50 
per  cent  of  lint,  and  developed  to  its  present  form  by  repeated  selec- 
tions of  seed  from  the  most  prolific  plants.  Plants  of  medium  size, 
well  branched;  limbst short  jointed;  bolls  medium  in  size,  oval,  not 
clustered,  not  maturing  very  early;  lint  34  to  36  per  cent;  staple  22 
to  25  mm.  Seed  occasionally  black  and  smooth.  There  are  very  few 
varieties  which  yield  so  large  a  percentage  of  lint,  and  this  is  one  of 
the  best  of  the  Eio  Grande  type. 


208  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

Peterlcin  Limb  Cluster  (Peterkin  New  Cluster). — Developed  by  J.  A. 
Peterkin  through  selections  from  the  Peterkin,  and  similar  to  that 
variety  excepting  that  the  bolls  are  somewhat  clustered. 

Petit  Gulf. — One  of  the  oldest  varieties ;  originated  by  Col.  H.  W.Vick, 
the  originator  of  the  Jethro,  about  1840.  In  1848-40  large  quanti- 
ties of  the  seed  were  sent  to  Georgia  and  Alabama,  and  as  the  ship- 
ments were  all  made  from  Petit  Gulf  the  variety  became  known  under 
that  name.  The  plant  is  large,  long  limbed,  and  long  jointed,  not  very 
prolific;  bolls  medium  in  size,  ovate,  not  maturing  early;  lint  30  to  32 
per  cent;  staple  22  to  25  mm.  Boyd  Prolific  and  Dickson  are  i>robably 
descended  from  this  variety. 

Pittman  (Pittman  Extra  Prolific,  Pittman  Improved). — An  early 
maturing,  short-limbed,  cluster  variety,  from  Louisiana,  and  which 
does  not  differ  essentially  from  Dickson. 

Pitt  Prolific. — Mentioned  as  having  been  grown  in  Mississippi  in 
1848,  and  doubtfully  distinct  from  Banana.  ISTo  longer  in  cultivation 
under  that  name. 

Pollock. — Originated  in  1800  by  W.  A.  Pollock,  Greenville,  Miss.,  by 
fertilizing  some  unknown  long-staple  variety  with  pollen  from  Peer- 
less. A  cluster  variety  maturing  a  little  later  than  the  Peerless,  with 
a  staple  35  to  40  mm. 

Poor  Maris  Belief. — A  California  variety,  not  distinguishable  from 
Peterkin. 
Prolific.     (See  Sugar  Loaf.) 
Prout.     (See  Banana.) 

Queen  (Southern  Queen). — A  local  Arkansas  variety,  very  similar  to 
Peterkin,  and  probably  the  same. 

Barneses. — An  old  variety,  apparently  a  form  of  Peerless. 
Eichardson  Improved.     (See  Jones  Long  Staple.) 
Bio  Grande. — An  early  name  for  the  original  form  of  many  of  the 
upland  short-staple  varieties,  yielding  34  to  36  per  cent  of  lint,  with  a 
staple  18  to  22  mm. 

Bod  Smith  25  Gent. — Grown  in  Mississippi  in  1849,  and  described  as 
having  "limbs  long  and  slender,  bolls  slim,  very  prolific."  Not  now 
known. 

Boe  Early. — A  local  Louisiana  variety,  maturing  early,  with  28  to  30 
per  cent  of  lint,  and  a  staple  25  to  30  mm. 
S.  B.  Maxey.     (See  Maxey.) 

Sea  Lsland. — This  is  a  native  of  the  West  Indies  and  Central  America, 
and  was  one  of  the  first  varieties  cultivated  in  the  United  States.  In 
the  limited  region  where  it  can  be  grown  it  is  the  most  desirable  variety, 
as  it  produces  a  very  long  and  fine  staple,  which  commands  the  highest 
price,  but  it  is  seldom  profitable  when  grown  more  than  50  miles  from 
the  Atlantic  coast. 

Shine  Parly. — From  J.  A.  Shine,  Shine,  N.  C.     An  early  maturing 
variety  of  the  Rio  Grande  type,  and  differing  but  little  from  Peterkin. 
Silk.     (See  Jethro.) 


CULTIVATED  VARIETIES  OF  COTTON.  209 

Simpson.     (See  Dickson.) 

Six  Oaks. — Originated  by  J.  V.  Jones,  Herndon,  Ga,,  the  original 
form  being  the  Jethro,  which  was  sent  from  Mississippi  in  1840.  It 
is  similar  to  the  Jones  Long  Staple,  except  that  the  plant  is  less  vig- 
orous, the  bolls  are  not  quite  so  large,  and  the  seed  are  smooth  and 
black.    Lint  28  to  30  per  cent,  staple  35  to  40  mm. 

Smith  Standard.     (See  Ben  Smith.) 

South  Carolina  Pride.     (See  Early  Carolina.) 

Southern  Hope. — Originated  many  years  ago  by  Col.  F.  Eobieu,  of 
Louisiana,  from  seed  said  to  have  come  from  Peru.  Plant  pyramidal; 
limbs  strong  and  straight,  prolific;  bolls  large,  pointed,  maturing 
rather  late;  lint  30  to  32  per  cent,  staple  28  to  32  mm.  One  of  the  best 
types  for  the  southern  cotton  belt,  but  maturing  too  late  for  northern 
latitudes. 

Spider  Web.     (See  Cobweb.) 

Storm  Proof.     (See  Texas  Storm  Proof.) 

Sugar  Loaf  (Lewis  Prolific,  Prolific,  Vick  100  Seed). — This  is  said  to 
have  originated  in  Yalobusha  County,  Miss.,  in  1843-44,  and  to  have 
come  from  Mexican  seed.     A  cluster  variety  not  now  in  cultivation. 

Sutton  Peerless.     (See  Peerless.) 

Talbot,     (See  Allen.) 

Tarver. — Grown  in  Alabama  as  early  as  1848,  and  probably  the  same 
as  Sugar  Loaf. 

Taylor. — This  name  is  given  to  at  least  two  distinct  varieties,  the 
one  known  in  Alabama  under  that  name  having  a  small  boll  and  a 
short  staple,  while  that  from  South  Carolina  has  a  large  boll  and 
a  long  staple.  In  both  States  the  name  seems  to  be  only  local.  The 
original  Taylor  of  Alabama  was  claimed  to  be  a  cross  between  the 
Purple  Leaf  and  Boyd  Prolific,  showing  principally  the  characters  of 
the  former. 

Tennessee  Gold  Dust.     (See  King.) 

Tennessee  Silk.     (See  Ozier.) 

Texas  Storm  Proof  (Bahama,  Drought  Proof,  Storm  Proof). — Prom 
W.  J.  Sinilie,  Baileyville,  Tex.  Plant  tall,  with  slender  and  often 
drooping  limbs,  not  very  prolific;  bolls  large,  pointed,  maturing  late; 
lint  33  to  35  per  cent,  staple  23  to  2G  mm.  The  matured  seed  cotton 
does  not  fall  from  the  bolls  as  readily  as  in  most  varieties,  and  hence 
its  name  of  "  Storm  Proof." 

Texas  Wood. — Prom  D.  F.  Miles,  Marion,  S.  C.  Not  distinguishable 
from  Peterkiu,  and  probably  identical  with  that  variety. 

The  Premium.     (See  Peerless.) 

Truitt  Premium  (Truitt  Improved). — Originated  by  G.  W.  Truitt, 
Lagrange,  Ga,  Plants  large;  limbs  long  and  spreading,  prolific;  bolls 
very  large,  roundish,  maturing  late;  lint  30  to  32  per  cent,  staple  22  to 
25  mm.     Very  similar  to  Duncan  Mammoth  and  Mammoth  Prolific, 

Vick  100  Seed.     (See  Sugar  Loaf.) 
1993— No.  33 14 


210  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Welbom  Pet. —  Originated  by  Jeff  Welborn,  New  Boston,  Tex. 
Developed  from  selected  plants  in  a  field  of  Barnes,  Jones  Big  Boll 
(Jones  Long  Staple?),  and  Zellner.  Plant  erect,  slender;  limbs  short 
and  numerous,  very  prolific;  bolls  round,  medium  in  size,  clustered, 
maturing  early;  lint  31  to  32  per  cent,  staple  22  to  25  mm.  This 
variety  lias  but  little  foliage  in  proportion  to  the  size  of  the  plant, 
which  many  cultivators  claim  is  an  advantage  in  hastening  early  and 
uniform  maturity.     One  of  the  best  known  cluster  varieties. 

Williams. — An  old  short-staple  variety  yielding  33  to  35  per  cent  of 
lint  and  probably  identical  with  Peterkin. 

Williamson. — From  E.  M.  Williamson,  Dovesville,  S.  C.  Plant  not 
large;  limbs  short,  prolific;  bolls  small,  round,  maturing  early;  lint 
30  to  31  per  cent,  staple  22  to  25  mm. 

Willimantic. — Very  similar  to  Duncan  Mammoth  and  Mammoth  Pro- 
lific. 

Willis. — From  J.  B.  Allen,'  Port  Gibson,  Miss.  Much  like  Allen 
in  growth,  with  lint  20  to  30  per  cent,  and  a  staple  33  to  37  mm. 

Wimberly. — From  F.  D.  Wimberly,  Billiards,  Ga.  Can  not  be  dis- 
tinguished from  Duncan. 

Wise.     (See  Peterkin.) 

Wonderful  (Jones  Wonderful).-— From  J.  H.  Jones,  the  originator  of 
several  other  varieties  bearing  his  name.  Tliis  is  similar  to  the  Jones 
Long  Staple,  but  has  a  larger  boll  and  a  smaller  seed,  with  a  longer  and 
finer  staple.  Bulletin  20  of  the  Georgia  Station  says  "it  is  an  excel- 
lent type  of  the  upland  long-staple  varieties,  and  is  more  productive 
and  of  better  staple  than  any  other  of  the  class  tested  on  the  station." 
Lint  28  to  30  per  cent,  staple  35  to  40  mm. 

Zellner. — Probably  developed  by  selections  from  Boyd  Prolific.  Plant 
small  to  medium,  limbs  short,  prolific;  bolls  medium  or  small,  round, 
maturing  early;  lint  30  to  31  per  cent,  staple  20  to  25  mm.  Very 
much  like  Dickson. 

In  the  preparation  of  the  foregoing  descriptions  great  care  has  been 
exercised  to  avoid  duplication  of  varieties  under  different  names, 
though  that  has  probably  been  done  in  a  few  instances,  and  no  names 
have  been  given  as  synonyms  excepting  when  it  has  been  impossible  to 
separate  the  varieties  either  by  description  or  by  personal  observation. 

As  showing  the  instability  of  varieties  it  is  interesting  to  note  that 
in  the  report  on  cotton  of  the  Tenth  Census,  58  varietal  names  are 
mentioned.  Of  these,  we  have  not  been  able  to  find  that  more  than  15 
have  been  used  during  the  last  ten  years,  and  only  G  of  the  varieties 
popular  in  1880  are  still  in  common  cultivation.  Those  which  have 
stood  the  test  of  the  fourteen  years  since  1880  are  Boyd  Prolific,  Dick- 
son, Herlong,  Peeler,  Petit  Gulf,  and  Texas  Storm  Proof. 

FOREIGN  VARIETIES. 

Several  varieties  of  cotton  from  Japan,  Russia,  Egypt,  and  India 
have  been  planted  in  the  United  States  during  the  last  ten  years,  but 


CULTIVATED    VARIETIES    OF    COTTON.  211 

none  of  them  has  proved  suited  to  the  conditions  in  this  country.  The 
varieties  received  from  Japan  have  produced  very  dwarf  plants,  with 
small  bolls,  very  small  seeds,  and  a  staple  not  more  than  12  to  15  mm., 
which  has  been  harsh  and  woolly.  The  Russian  cottons  have  been  uni- 
formly light  in  yield,  short  and  weak  in  staple,  and  usually  somewhat 
colored.  The  Egyptian  varieties  are  closely  related  to  the  Sea  Island, 
and  produce  an  immense  growth  of  stalk.1  Afifi  and  Bamia  are  the 
two  varieties  which  have  been  most  widely  tested,  but  neither  has 
proved  to  be  profitable.  Both  produce  a  very  long  and  fine  staple,  but 
mature  too  late  for  our  climate.  Seeds  of  both  these  varieties  were 
distributed  quite  freely  by  the  Department  in  1892,  and  since  then  a 
number  of  hybrids  between  them  and  some  of  the  upland  American 
varieties  have  been  reported  winch  promise  to  have  considerable  value, 
especially  in  the  southern  part  of  the  cotton  region.  The  Indian  vari- 
eties which  have  been  received  have  been  of  two  distinct  types.  One 
is  much  like  the  Japanese  varieties  in  leaf,  boll,  and  lint,  but  produces 
a  large  and  spreading  plant  which  bears  a  very  light  crop.  The  other 
type  is  evidently  descended  from  the  American  seed  which  was  sent  to 
India  in  1844,  and  which  has  become  quite  common  in  that  country.  It 
is  interesting  to  note  that  this  American  cotton  which  has  been  grown 
in  India  for  fifty  years  has  come  back  to  this  country  practically 
unchanged,  and  can  not  now  be  distinguished  from  the  Petit  Gulf,  which 
was  so  common  in  this  country  from  1830  to  1850. 

ORIGINATION   OF   VARIETIES. 

Of  course  the  origin  of  many  of  the  varieties  has  been  lost  in  obscu- 
rity, but  from  what  has  been  gathered  it  appears  that  the  most  frequent 
methods  by  which  new  varieties  have  been  originated  have  been  by  (1) 
the  selection  of  individual  plants  for  the  original  stock;  (2)  the  saving 
of  seed  from  the  earliest  maturing  bolls,  and  planting  them  (usually) 
on  soil  which  had  been  highly  fertilized ;  (3)  cross  fertilization,  and  (4) 
the  very  simple  process  of  changing  the  name. 

PLANT   SELECTION. 

Every  observant  planter  has  noticed  the  great  differences  which  may 
be  seen  among  the  plants  in  any  field,  even  though  the  seed  used  may 
all  have  come  from  the  same  source.  The  different  plants  will  vary  in 
height  and  vigor  of  stalks,  in  length  and  direction  of  limbs,  in  size  and 
sliape  of  leaves,  and  in  the  arrangement  of  bolls  on  the  stalk.  Some 
plants  will  mature  all  their  bolls  within  a  few  days  of  each  other,  while 
other  plants  will  mature  slowly  and  yield  successive  pickings  through 
several  weeks.  Any  one  of  these  characteristics  may  be,  to  a  certain 
extent,  strengthened  and  perpetuated  by  the  saving  of  seed  from  plants 
having  the  desired  characters  most  strongly  developed,  and  afterwards 

1  See  also  article  on  history  of  cotton,  p.  47. 


212  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

growing  tlieni  in  a  field  so  far  removed  from  other  cotton  that  there 
will  be  no  clanger  from  cross  fertilization.  If  this  process  is  repeated 
for  a  few  years,  selecting-  seed  each  year  from  those  stalks  which  are 
nearest  the  ideal  form,  the  variety  will  become  more  and  more  fixed 
with  each  succeeding  crop,  and  each  year  the  entire  crop  will  approacli 
nearer  to  the  desired  standard.  It  has  been  by  this  process  that  many 
of  the  more  strongly  marked  varieties  like  Cook,  Dickson,  and  Welborn 
Pet  have  been  produced.     A  bulletin  of  the  Louisiana  Station  ]  says  : 

First,  determine  what  you  want — have  a  fixed  standard  in  view.  Then  goto  your 
plants,  whatever  they  may  he,  and  select  carefully  that  one  which  comes  nearest  to 
filling  these  requirements.  Then  carefully  gather  the  seeds  of  that  plant,  and  in 
the  proper  season  plant  them.  Again  exercise  the  same  care  in  selecting  your  seed 
and  repeat  the  operation  until  you  finally  reach  the  ohject  required.  It  takes  time 
for  this,  and  there  are  frequent  disappointments.  Do  not  misunderstand  us  as 
recommending  every  farmer  to  go  into  tho  business  of  originating  varieties.  At  the 
most,  whether  it  be  by  selection  or  by  hybridizing,  it  requires  more  time  and 
patience  than  many  of  us  possess.  But  wo  do  urge  upon  each  and  all  the  importance 
of  exercising  the  greatest  care  iu  the  selection  of  their  seed.  The  day  is  not  far 
distant,  in  fact  is  even  here,  when  the  kind  of  seed  used  is  quite  an  item  in  the 
profit  and  loss  account  of  each  farmer,  and  he  who  neglects  it  is  bound,  sooner  or 
later,  to  go  to  the  wall  to  make  way  for  a  more  careful  successor. 

SAVING   SEED   FROM   EARLY   MATURING   ROLLS. 

The  second  method  named,  that  of  saving  seed  from  the  earliest  matur- 
ing bolls,  the  "first  pickings,"  is  practiced  largely,  and  it  is  to  this  process 
that  we  owe  many  of  the  widely  known  varieties  like  Drake  Cluster, 
Jethro,  and  Southern  Hope.  The  higher  fertilization  and  cultivation 
which  seed  saved  in  this  manner  usually  receive  also  tends  to  lengthen 
the  fiber,  make  the  plants  more  productive,  and  so  assists  still  further 
variation  from  the  original  type.  Varieties  produced  in  this  manner, 
though  usually  superior  to  the  original  stock,  are  not  strongly  marked, 
and  the  improvement  is  less  permanent  than  is  that  which  may  be  pro- 
duced by  the  selection  of  individual  plants.  In  fact,  these  should 
hardly  be  recognized  as  distinct  varieties,  and  in  the  naming  of  such 
the  word  "improved"  is  often  prefixed  to  the  name  of  the  parent 
variety. 

CROSS  FERTILIZATION. 

When  it  is  desired  to  combine  the  good  qualities  of  two  varieties  in  a 
single  stock,  the  work  can  be  accomplished  best  by  cross  fertilization, 
and  it  is  more  than  probable  that  a  large  proportion  of  the  varieties 
which  have  come  from  single  plants  have  really  originated  accidentally 
in  this  manner.  It  is  equally  true  that  many  of  the  so-called  "crosses" 
and  "hybrids"  are  not  such,  but  are  merely  sports. 

Although  cross  fertilization  is  the  surest  method  for  the  production 
of  new  varieties,  it  is  largely  work  in  the  dark,  as  the  plants  resulting 
from  the  crosses  may  fail  to  show  the  good  qualities  of  either  parent 
and  have  all  the  weak  points  of  both.     Out  of  a  hundred  crosses  which 

1  Louisiana  Sta.  Bui.  2fr 


CULTIVATED  VARIETIES  OF  COTTON.  213 

may  be  grown,  it  is  .seldom  that  more  than  one  or  two  plants  will  show 
the  combination  desired,  and  even  when  a  promising  plant  does  appear 
its  character  is  not  yet  fixed,  and  several  generations  must  be  grown 
before  it  will  assume  its  permanent  form  and  demonstrate  its  real 
value.  Although  the  plants  from  a  single  line  of  crosses,  as  fertilizing 
Peterkin  with  Allen,  will  vary  widely,  still  it  is  a  general  rule  that 
the  character  and  habit  of  the  future  plant  will  be  more  like  those  of 
the  female  parent,  while  the  fruit,  the  boll  and  its  contents,  will  be 
more  like  those  of  the  male  parent. 

The  flower  of  the  cottou  plant  is  so  large  and  develops  so  rapidly  that 
cross  fertilization  is  very  easily  secured.  Flowers  which  are  to  be  fer- 
tilized should  be  among  those  which  are  developed  early  in  the  season, 
and  should  always  be  those  on  healthy  and  vigorous  plants.  The  flow- 
ers to  be  operated  upon  should  be  selected  late  in  the  afternoon,  as  it 
is  only  at  that  time  that  they  are  in  the  proper  condition  for  the  work. 
One  side  of  the  unopened  bud  should  be  split  lengthwise  with  a  sharp 
knife  having  a  slender  blade,  and  the  stamens  removed.  The  anthers, 
the  fertilizing  parts  of  the  stamens,  will  be  found  well  developed  and 
standing  well  away  from  the  pistil,  though  not  yet  so  matured  as  to  be 
discharging  pollen.  These  can  be  readily  separated  from  their  supports 
by  a  few  careful  raking  strokes  of  the  knife,  and  the  emasculated  flower 
should  then  be  inclosed  in  a  paper  bag  to  prevent  access  of  pollen  from 
unknown  sources.  The  following  morning  the  pistil  will  be  fully  devel- 
oped and  ready  to  receive  pollen.  A  freshly  opened  flower  from  a 
healthy  plant  of  the  variety  which  it  is  desired  to  use  in  making  the 
cross  is  picked  and  carried  to  the  plant  which  was  treated  the  previous 
evening,  the  bag  is  removed  from  the  prepared  flower,  and,  by  means 
of  a  camel's  hair  brush,  pollen  is  dusted  over  the  end  and  upper  rjart  of 
the  pistil.  The  paper  bag  is  then  replaced  and  allowed  to  remain  two 
days,  after  which  it  should  be  removed.  If  more  than  one  variety  is 
used  to  furnish  pollen  for  different  flowers,  a  tag  bearing  the  name  ot 
the  variety  from  which  the  pollen  was  taken  should  be  attached  to  the 
limb  just  below  each  fertilized-  flower.  When  the  fertilized  bolls  are 
matured,  those  from  each  line  of  crosses  should  be  saved  separately  and 
the  seed  from  each  planted  separately  the  next  season.  The  plants 
resulting  from  such  crosses  will  vary  greatly,  even  when  all  come  from 
seeds  from  a  single  boll.  Any  which  appear  to  be  wanting  in  vigor 
should  be  destroyed  as  soon  as  their  weakness  is  shown,  and  only 
healthy  and  vigorous  plants  allowed  to  mature.  When  the  plants 
approach  maturity  they  should  again  be  examined  carefully,  and  all 
which  show  a  want  of  fruitfulness,  a  tendency  to  disease,  or  any  other 
undesirable  character  should  be  removed.  At  the  same  time  those 
plants  which  approach  most  nearly  to  the  ideal,  i.  e.,  those  which  are 
strong  and  vigorous,  which  produce  the  largest  number  of  bolls,  and 
which  have  the  longest  and  best  fiber  and  the  largest  proportion  of 
fiber  to  seed,  should  be  marked,  and  the  seed  from  each  of  these  saved 


214  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

separately.  As  the  earlier  maturing  bolls  always  produce  the  bet- 
ter crop,  the  later  ripening  bolls  from  the  selected  plants  should  be 
discarded. 

The  following  season  the  seed  from  each  of  the  selected  plants  should 
be  planted  separately,  and  then,  and  not  until  then,  will  the  planter  be 
able  to  form  an  intelligent  estimate  of  the  true  value  of  his  crosses. 

It  will  be  seen  that  such  work  requires  care,  judgment,  and  patience, 
but  it  is  the  only  plan  by  which  the  special  characteristics  of  different 
varieties  can  be  combined  in  one;  it  is  the  only  way  by  which  the  planter 
can  secure  such  a  definite  modification  of  the  plant  as  he  may  wish,  and  it 
establishes  varieties  having  greater  permanency  of  character  than  can 
be  produced  in  any  other  manner. 

CHANGE   OF  NAME. 

By  far  the  larger  part  of  the  names  of  varieties  now  in  cultivation  are 
simply  synonyms  of  other  names.  Changes  of  name  are  commonly 
made  by  using  the  name  of  the  person  from  whom  seed  is  purchased, 
giving  a  new  name  to  an  old  variety  for  advertising  purposes,  substi- 
tuting a  local  name  for  one  in  general  use,  or  transferring  names  from 
one  locality  to  another.     Often  several  varieties  receive  the  same  name. 

IMPROVEMENT    AND   DETERIORATION    OF    VARIETIES.  * 

The  cultivated  cottons  of  to-day  are  very  different  from  the  original 
form  of  Oossyinum  herbaeeum,  which  gave  only  28  to  30  per  cent  of  lint, 
with  a  staple  20  to  30  mm.  long.  The  proportion  of  lint  has  been  greatly 
increased,  reaching  as  high  as  36  and  even  40  per  cent  in  some  varieties, 
while  the  length  of  staple  has  increased  correspondingly,  sometimes 
reaching  fully  three  times  its  original  length.  In  but  few  varieties, 
however,  have  we  secured  any  marked  increase  in  both  j>ercentage  of 
lint  and  length  of  staple,  and  it  is  in  that  direction  that  we  should  look 
for  improvements  in  the  future. 

The  tendency  of  the  plant  to  vary  from  the  typical  form  of  any  variety 
has  been  mentioned  on  another  page,  and  it  should  be  borne  in  mind 
that  the  natural  tendency  of  this  variation  will  be  back  toward  its  origi- 
nal form  rather  than  in  any  other  direction.  Abnormal  fruitfulness  is 
always  secured  at  the  expense  of  vitality,  and  the  original  form,  pro- 
ducing a  smaller  amount  of  fruit,  will  have  the  greater  vitality,  and  so 
a  greater  prepotency,  than  will  the  more  fruitful  and  more  desirable,  but 
weaker,  plants.  If,  then,  any  improved  variety  is  to  be  kept  up  to  its 
present  standard,  constant  care  in  the  selection  of  seed  is  essential. 
The  seed  from  all  plants  which  show  degeneration  should  be  rejected, 
and  only  those  from  typical  plants  should  be  saved.  Whenever  these 
precautions  are  neglected,  degeneration  is  sure  to  follow,  and  we  soon 
hear  complaints  that  the  variety  has  "run  out."  All  of  our  present 
varieties  are  artificial,  and  have  been  produced  by  artificial  methods, 
which  must  be  continued  as  long  as  the  variety  is  to  be  maintained. 
Continued  intelligent  selection  and  cross  fertilization  may  work  a  gradual 


CULTIVATED    VARIETIES    OF    COTTON.  215 

improvement,  while  neglect  in  the  selection  of  seed  is  sure  to  result  in 
degeneration  and  reversion  to  the  original  form.  It  is  for  this  reason 
that  planters  are  so  often  disappointed  with  the  results  secured  from 
new  varieties  for  which  extravagant  claims  have  been  made  by  their 
originators.  These  new  varieties  may  do  all  that  is  claimed  for  them 
during  the  first  one  or  two  years,  but  afterwards,  in  many  cases,  dete- 
riorate rapidly,  and  their  originators  are  denounced  as  frauds. 

The  too  common  method  of  saving  seed  for  planting  is  to  take  a  suffi- 
cient number  of  bushels  just  as  they  come  from  the  gin,  or,  perhaps,  to 
buy  them  from  an  oil  mill.  Xo  attention  has  been  given  to  the  selec- 
tion of  the  individual  plants  from  which  these  seeds  came,  and  those 
from  the  poorest,  least  prolific,  and  latest  maturing  are  all  taken 
together  with  those  from  the  best.  Seed  from  the  less  prolific  plants 
will  have  greater  vitality  and  so  produce  stronger  plants  than  those 
from  the  more  prolific  individuals,  and  when  this  process  is  repeated 
for  a  few  generations  it  is  sure  to  result  in  a  marked  decrease  in  yield 
and  a  deterioration  in  quality.  In  speaking  of  the  instability  of  varie- 
ties, W.  A.  Cook  says : 

I  can  take  any  of  the  so-called  distinct  varieties  of  cotton  and  in  a  few  years 
develop  ail  the  known  varieties  from  it.  In  other  words,  they  will  develop  them- 
selves in  the  course  of  time.  All  that  is  necessary  is  to  watch  the  field  from  year  to 
year,  and  when  a  "sport"  is  noticed,  save  the  seeds  and  plant  them  hy  themselves. 

J.  Griffin,  the  originator  of  the  Griffin  variety,  writes : 

Since  1868  I  have  not  omitted  a  single  year  in  my  selections,  which  are  guided  by 
length,  fineness,  prolific  tendency,  earliness,  and,  lately,  smallness  of  seed,  to  humor 
planters.  I  can  now  see  that  it  will  take  more  than  the  remainder  of  my  life  to 
complete  my  work,  as  the  variety  still  improves  as  at  the  first. 

J.  H.  Jones,  of  Georgia,  says : 

There  is  no  other  plant  known  in  our  agriculture  which  deteriorates  so  rapidly  and 
requires  such  a  rigid  selection  of  seed  to  keep  it  up  to  a  standard  as  does  cotton. 

The  Sixth  Eeport  of  the  Mississippi  Station  says : 

The  particular  variety  to  be  selected  *  *  *  depends  more  on  the  care  with 
which  the  seed  has  been  selected  during  the  last  two' or  three  years  than  upon  its 
original  source,  and  without  constant  care  in  the  selection  of  seed  any  variety  will 
soon  "run  out."  The  first  pickings  will  give  better  seed  than  will  the  later  pickings ; 
and  if  the  seed  be  saved  from  the  best  stalks  only,  the  practice  will  soon  work  a 
marked  improvement  in  any  variety.  Even  when  this  can  not  be  done  for  the  entire 
crop,  it  will  be  easy  to  secure  enough  of  this  selected  seed  to  plant  a  small  field,  which 
will  produce  sufficient  seed  for  the  entire  crop  of  the  second  season.  It  has  been  by 
the  following  of  this  plan  that  nearly  all  of  our  best  varieties  have  been  developed, 
and  the  superiority  of  any  variety  is  usually  a  very  good  measure  of  the  care  and 
judgment  which  were  exercised  in  selecting  the  seed  plants  of  the  original  stock. 

CLASSIFICATION   OF  VARIETIES. 

With  so  many  varieties  which  differ  from  each  other  only  slightly, 
and  with  their  differences  those  of  degree  rather  than  of  kind,  and  all 
of  them  exceedingly  unstable,  it  is  impossible  to  classify  them  by  any 
natural  and  fixed  characters,  or  even  to  assign  limits  to  different  groups 
which  will  not  sometimes  .separate  varieties  which  resemble  each  other 
closely,  and  any  grouping  must  be  purely  arbitrary. 


216  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

If  classified  according  to  the  proportion  of  lint  to  seed,  they  may  be 
placed  in  three  groups,  as  follows : 

(1)  Those  having  less  than  30  per  cent  of  lint,  including  Allen,  Bailey, 
Bragg,  Cobweb,  Colthorp  Pride,  Cook,  Eureka,  Terrell,  Griffin,  Jones 
Long  Staple,  Matthews,  Boe  Early,  Six  Oaks,  Wonderful,  and  Willis. 

(2)  Those  having  from  30  to  34  per  cent  of  lint.  This  group  will 
include  more  than  one-half  of  all  our  recognized  varieties,  as  follows: 
Barnett,  Bates  Favorite,  Ben  Smith,  Boyd  Prolific,  Chambers,  Champion 
Cluster,  Cherry  Cluster,  Dickson,  Drake  Cluster,  Ellsworth,  Hawkins, 
Herlong,  Hunnicutt,  Jones  Improved,  Jones  No.  I,  Kieth,  King, 
Magruder  Marvel,  Magruder  XL,  Mammoth  Prolific,  Marston,  Mattis, 
Maxey,  Minter,  Moon,  Oats,  Okra,  Ozier,  Peeler,  Peerless,  Petit  Gulf, 
Southern  Hope,  Truitt  Premium,  Welborn  Pet,  Williamson,  and  Zellner. 

(3)  Those  having  34  or  more  per  cent  of  lint,  including  Bates  Big  Boll, 
Big  Boll,  Brannon,  Catawba,  Excelsior,  Grayson,  Jenkins,  Peterkin, 
Bio  Grande,  and  Texas  Storm  Proof. 

If  the  same  varieties  are  classified  according  to  length  of  staple  only, 
they  may  again  be  placed  in  three  groups,  as  follows: 

(4)  Those  having  a  staple  less  than  25  mm.,  or  "short-staple"  varie- 
ties, including  Barnett,  Ben  Smith,  Boyd  Prolific,  Brannon,  Catawba, 
Chambers,  Cherry  Cluster,  Dickson,  Drake  Cluster,  Ellsworth,  Grayson, 
Hawkins,  Herlong,  Hunnicutt,  Jenkins,  Jones  Improved,  Jones'  No.  1, 
Minter,  Oats,  Peterkin,  Petit  Gulf,  Bio  Grande,  Texas  Storm  Proof, 
Truitt  Premium,  Welborn  Pet,  Williamson,  and  Zellner. 

(5)  Those  having  a  staple  of  from  25  to  30  mm.,  or  the  "medium- 
staple"  varieties,  including  Bates  Big  Boll,  Bates  Favorite,  Big  Boll, 
Champion  Cluster,  Excelsior,  Kieth,  King,  Magruder  Marvel,  Magruder 
XL,  Mammoth  Prolific,  Marston,  Mattis,  Okra,  Ozier,  Peeler.  Peerless, 
and  Boe  Early. 

(6)  Those  having  a  staple  exceeding  30  mm.,  or  the  "long-staple" 
varieties,  including  Allen,  Bailey,  Bragg,  Cobweb,  Colthorp  Pride, 
Cook,  Eureka,  Ferrell,  Griffin,  Jones  Long  Staple,  Matthews,  Maxey, 
Moon,  Six  Oaks,  Southern  Hope,  Willis,  and  Wonderful. 

Group  1  has  15  varieties,  of  which  14  belong  in  group  6  and  1  in 
group  5.  The  varieties  in  this  group,  with  the  doubtful  exception  of 
Boe  Early,  of  which  we  are  able  to  find  but  one  record,  are  what  are 
commonly  called  "long-staple"  varieties,  and  are  almost  uniformly 
varieties  in  which  the  plant  is  large  and  vigorous,  the  limbs  long  and 
spreading,  the  bolls  large,  and  which  usually  mature  late. 

Group  2  has  36  varieties,  of  which  20  belong  in  group  4,  13  in  group 
5,  and  3  in  group  G.  In  this  group  we  have  what  may  be  termed  the 
normal  type  of  cotton,  with  a  slight  increase  in  both  percentage  of  lint 
and  length  of  staple,  some  varieties  showing  an  improvement  in  only 
one  direction,  but  nearly  all  showing  that  both  the  amount  and  quality 
of  the  fiber  have  been  materially  bettered  by  cultivation. 

Group  3  has  1.0  varieties,  of  which  7  belong  in  group  4  and  3  in  group 


CULTIVATED  VARIETIES  OP  COTTON. 


217 


5.  In  this  group  we  have  varieties  in  which  the  percentage  of  lint  has 
been  greatly  increased  with  but  little  improvement  in  the  character  of 
the  staple,  nearly  every  variety  in  the  group  having  a  staple  less  than 
25  mm.  in  length. 

Group  4  has  27  varieties,  of  which  20  belong  iu  group  2  and  7  in 
group  3. 

Group  5" has  17  varieties,  of  which  13  belong  in  group  2,  3  in  group  3, 
and  1  in  group  1. 

Group  6  has  17  varieties,  of  which  13  belong  in  group  1  and  3  in 
group  2. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  correspondence  between  group  1,  pro- 
ducing less  than  30  per  cent  of  lint,  and  group  6,  having  a  staple  more 
than  30  millimeters  in  length,  is  very  close,  only  3  of  the  "long-staple" 
varieties  yielding  more  than  30  per  cent  of  lint,  and  only  1  variety 
which  yields  less  than  30  per  cent  of  lint  having  a  staple  less  than 
30  mm.  The  correspondence  between  the  other  pairs  of  groups — 2  and 
5,  3  and  6 — is  less  marked,  but  still  shows  a  strong  tendency  toward  a 
decrease  in  length  of  staple  as  the  percentage  of  lint  is  increased. 

If  classified  according  to  time  of  maturity,  the  varieties  may  be 
grouped  as  follows : 

Classification  of  varieties  according  to  time  of  maturity. 


Early. 

Medium. 

Late. 

Bailey. 

Barnett. 

Allen. 

Brooks  Improved. 

Bates  Big  Boll. 

Barnes. 

Cherry  Cluster. 

Ben  Smith. 

Bates  Favorite. 

Dickson. 

Boyd  Prolific. 

Brag    Long  Staple. 

Drake  Cluster. 

Brannon. 

Catawba. 

Early  Carolina. 

East. 

Champion  Cluster. 

Grayson  Early  Prolific. 

Eureka. 

Cobweb. 

Hiinnicutt. 

Griffith. 

Colthorp  Pride. 

Jenkins. 

Hawkins. 

Cook. 

Kieth. 

Herlong. 

Ellsworth. 

King. 

Jones  Long  Staple. 
Magruder  Marvel. 

Ethridge. 

Matthews. 

Jones  Improved. 

Oats. 

Mattis. 

Mammoth  Prolific. 

Okra. 

Moon. 

Marston. 

Ozier. 

Peterkin. 

Minter. 

Peerless1, 

Peterkin  Cluster. 

Peeler. 

Pittinan. 

Petit  Gulf. 

Southern  Hope. 

Welborn  Pet. 

Pollock. 

Texas  Storm  Proof. 

Williamson. 

Six  Oaks. 

Truitt  Premium. 

Zellner. 

Willis. 

The  Arkansas  Station1  classifies  varieties  according  to  habit  of 
growth,  placing  them  in  two  groups — the  "long  limb,"  which  is  charac- 
terized by  its  long  and  spreading  branches,  want  of  prolificacy,  large 
bolls,  late  maturity,  and  long  staple;  and  the  " short  limb,"  character- 
ized by  its  short  branches,  medium  or  small  bolls,  prolificacy,  early 
maturity,  and  short  staple.  The  same  article  also  says  that  the  varie- 
ties of  the  "long-limb"  group  grow  slowly,  require  less  readily  available 
plant  food  and  less  frequent  cultivation  than  the  "short  limb,"  which 
is  regarded  as  being  a  direct  product  of  high  culture  and  especially 


'■  Arkansas  Sta.  Rpt.  1893. 


218  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

suitable  for  high  farming.  It  also  states  that  the  short-limbed  and 
cluster  cottons  can  not  be  made  to  produce  as  long  a  fiber  as  the  long- 
limbed  varieties,  and  suggests  that  in  many  cases  length  of  staple 
should  be  sacrificed  for  quantity,  or  more  strictly  speaking,  that  it  is 
often  better  to  sacrifice  length  of  staple  in  order  to  secure  an  early 
matured  and  increased  crop  winch  may  be  picked  at  a  low  cost,  and 
before  it  is  damaged  by  winds  and  rain.  ' 

RELATIVE   VALUES   OF  VARIETIES. 

In  deciding  upon  the  relative  values  of  different  varieties  of  cotton 
the  planter  will  be  guided  wholly  by  the  number  of  dollars  per  acre 
which  each  variety  will  bring,  and  what  variety  he  shall  choose  is  a 
question  to  which  no  definite  reply  can  be  given.  The  same  variety 
will  give  different  yields  in  different  years,  on  account  of  early  or  late 
frosts  and  the  amount  of  rainfall  in  different  months,  especially  from 
August  to  October.  Some  varieties  are  more  liable  to  suffer  from  insects 
than  are  others.  Some  varieties  which  make  a  long,  fine,  and  silky 
staple  when  grown  on  rich,  damp,  and  alluvial  soil,  such  as  is  found 
only  along  the  larger  rivers,  are  of  but  little  value  when  planted  on 
the  high  and  dry  uplands.  Some  varieties  respond  much  more  quickly 
than  others  to  applications  of  fertilizers;  some  produce  a  moderate 
crop  under  almost  any  conditions,  while  others  give  an  enormous  yield 
when  ail  the  surroundings  are  favorable  but  fail  miserably  when  planted 
on  unfavorable  soils  or  with  unfavorable  climatic  conditions.  The  rela- 
tive prices  of  the  lint  from  different  varieties  vary  greatly  from  one 
year  to  another.  In  1887  the  lint  from  the  long-staple  sorts,  those 
having  a  staple  35  mm.  or  more  in  length,  sold  in  the  New  Orleans 
markets  for  nearly  or  quite  double  the  prices  paid  for  the  short  staples, 
or  those  having  a  staple  20  to  30  mm.  in  length.  Since  then,  however, 
the  prices  have  been  approaching  each  other  more  and  more  closely, 
until  now  the  difference  is  only  from  10  to  20  per  cent.  The  yield 
in  pounds  per  acre  for  the  short-staple  varieties  is  always  larger  than 
for  the  long-staple  sorts,  though  the  amount  of  this  difference  will  vary 
greatly  with  the  localities  where  the  crops  are  grown.  In  the  hill 
regions  the  yield  of  the  short-staple  varieties  is  always  much  the  greater, 
and  is  often  fully  double  that  of  the  long  staples,  and  even  on  the  low- 
lands of  the  southern  portion  of  the  cotton  belt,  the  region  best  suited 
to  the  growth  of  the  long  staples,  there  is  always  a  difference  of  yield 
in  favor  of  the  short  staples.  The  long-staple  varieties  need  not  only  a 
rich  soil  but  the  best  of  care  in  cultivation,  handling,  and  ginning,  and 
require  the  highest  intelligence  and  skill  for  their  proper  management. 

Although  some  of  the  short-staple  varieties  are  late  in  maturing  their 
crop,  still  there  are  varieties  which  do  mature  much  earlier  than  any  of 
the  long-staple  varieties.  In  the  southern  portions  of  the  cotton-grow- 
ing region,  where  the  season  is  long,  this  is  a  matter  of  little  moment, 
but  it  becomes  a  point  of  the  greatest  importance  in  more  northern 
latitudes,  where  the   season  without  frost  is  not  sufficiently  long  to 


CULTIVATED  VARIETIES  OF  COTTON.  219 

mature  any  but  the  earliest  ripening*  sorts.  No  variety  of  cotton  will 
be  profitable  to  the  planter  if  it  does  not  have  a  sufficiently  long-  grow- 
ing season  in  which  to  mature  its  entire  crop,  and  it  is  safe  to  conclude 
that  the  short-staple  varieties  AYill  usually  be  found  the  more  profita- 
ble in  that  part  of  the  cotton  region  north  of  latitude  32°. 

The  character  of  every  plant  is  fixed  in  the  seed  from  which  it  comes, 
and  the  peculiar  vital  force  in  each  seed  is  determined  to  a  great 
degree  by  the  conditions  surrounding  the  parent  plant.  Heredity 
plays  an  important  part,  but  is  not  so  strong  as  to  wholly  overcome  the 
modifying  influences  of  climate,  soil,  and  season  when  these  are  acting  in 
the  same  direction  through  generations.  The  law  of  the  survival  of  the 
fittest  applies  to  cotton  as  elsewhere,  and  when  assisted  by  intelligence 
will  soon  develop  iu  each  region  the  special  type  of  plant  best  suited  to 
that  particular  locality.  A  reference  to  the  descriptions  of  the  long  sta- 
ple varieties  will  show  that  of  the  17  varieties  named  in  group  G  (p.  217), 
1  is  probably  a  hybrid  with  Sea  Island,  and  that  the  histories  of  2  otbers 
are  unknown.  Of  the  remaining  14,  6  originated  in  Mississippi,  3  in 
the  adjoining  State  of  Louisiana,  and  3  others  were  developed  in  Georgia 
from  seed  sent  there  from  Mississippi,  so  that  the  low  alluvial  soils  and 
moist  climate  of  the  Mississippi  River  region  have  furnished  the  nec- 
essary conditions  for  the  development  of  12  out  of  the  14.  In  no  other 
part  of  the  cotton-growing  region  are  the  long-staple  varieties  grown  so 
largely,  and  nowhere  else  do  they  approach  so  closely  to  the  yields 
made  by  the  short-staple  sorts.  Similar  conditions  exist  along  a  few 
of  the  larger  rivers  in  other  sections,  and  in  such  locations  the  long- 
staple  sorts  will  be  equally  successful,  but  such  areas  are  quite  limited 
in  extent.  Along  growing  season,  a  rich  soil,  and  a  humid  atmosphere 
are  all  essential  to  their  success,  and  it  is  useless  to  plant  them  where 
all  of  these  conditions  do  not  exist. 

The  great  increase  in  the  amount  of  Sea  Island  cotton  grown  in  this 
country,  together  with  the  rapidly  increasing  exportation  of  long  staple 
cotton  from  Egypt,  will  do  much  to  keep  down  the  prices  of  the  upland 
long-staple  varieties,  and  it  is  doubtful  whether  they  will  ever  again 
be  as  profitable  as  formerly  for  general  cultivation. 

North  of  latitude  32°  the  growing  season  is  so  short  that  only  those 
varieties  which  make  their  entire  growth  quickly  can  be  grown  with 
profit.  Among  the  earliest  ripening  varieties  are  Cherry  Cluster, 
Dickson,  Drake  Cluster,  Hawkins,  Hunnicutt,  King,  Peerless,  and 
Peterkin.  Of  these  8  varieties  6  belong  to  group  4,  having  a  staple 
less  than  25  mm.  in  length,  and  in  only  2  of  them — King  and  Peerless — 
do  we  find  representatives  of  group  5,  with  a  staple  from  25  to  30  mm. 
All  belong  to  group  2,  having  from  30  to  34  per  cent  of  lint.  We  may 
therefore  safely  conclude  that  the  best  varieties  for  the  northern  part 
of  the  cotton  region  will  be  such  as  have  a  short  or  medium  length  of 
staple,  together  with  a  fair  but  not  excessive  percentage  of  lint.  The 
long-staple  sorts  and  those  producing  more  than  34  per  cent  of  lint 
mature  too  late  to  be  grown  with  safety  in  this  region. 


220 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


In  the  middle  and  southern  portions  of  the  cotton  belt  early  maturity 
is  less  important,  though  often  an  advantage  by  enabling  the  planter 
to  gather  the  crop  without  injury  from  rains,  which  are  often  heavy  and 
frequent  in  November  and  December.  There  the  principal  point  to  be 
considered  is  which  variety  will  yield  the  greatest  number  of  pounds 
of  lint  per  acre,  as  there  is  very  little  difference  between  the  selling 
prices  of  20  mm.  and  30  mm.  staples.  The  common  varieties  which  may 
be  relied  upon  to  produce  84  per  cent  or  more  of  lint  are  Bates  Big  Boll, 
Brannon,  Catawba,  Excelsior,  Jenkins,  Peterkin,  Bio  Grande,  and  Texas 
Storm  Proof.  Of  these  8  varieties  G  belong  in  group  4,  those  having  a 
staple  of  less  than  25  mm.,  and  the  other  2,  each  of  which  produces 
only  33  to  35  per  cent,  belong  in  group  5.  An  excessive  percentage  of 
lint  and  a  long  or  even  a  medium  length  of  staple  are  never  found  in 
the  same  variety.  The  difference  in  yield  per  acre  between  the  short 
and  the  medium  staple  varieties  is  not  marked,  though  there  appears 
to  be  a  slight  difference  in  favor  of  the  shorter  staples. 

We  have  records  of  881  tests  of  59  varieties  which  have  been  made 
at  the  Southern  experiment  stations  during  the  last  seven  years,  each 
variety  having  been  tested  three  or  more  times.  By  taking  the  average 
yield  of  all  the  varieties  tested  at  each  station  during  each  year  as 
100,  the  relative  yield  and  rank  of  the  different  varieties  is  found  to  be 
as  follows : 

Relative  rank  as  regards  yield  of  different  varieties. 
[The  average  for  all  varieties  taken  as  100. J 


Variety. 


Haggerman 

Texas  Wood 

Taylor 

Brannon 

Peterkin 

Eishburn 

Thomas 

Kieth 

Drake  Cluster 

Excelsior 

King 

Boyid  Proline 

Truitt  Premium  ... 

Barnett 

Duncan 

Hunnicutt 

Jones  Improved 

Peerless 

Texas  Storm  Proof. 

Early  Carolina 

Bailey 

Kogeirs 

Dickson 

Deering 

Peterkin  Cluster. . . 

Shine  Early 

Welborn  Pet 

Ben  Smith. 

Dean 

Crawford  Peerless  . 


O 

Mi 

a* 

P 

S 
P 

a 

V, 

a 

a 

■3 

0 
3 

3 

149 

101" 

131 

9 

143 

105 

123 

7 

177 

06 

119 

9 

140 

102 

117 

53 

171 

70 

116 

4 

149 

95 

116 

5 

157 

101 

115 

-  5 

134 

100 

114 

6 

152 

88 

112 

10 

154 

84 

109 

44 

173 

76 

108 

10 

156 

68 

107 

45 

161 

40 

106 

6 

126 

83 

100 

8 

129 

86 

105 

8 

134 

74 

105 

23 

135 

82 

105 

30 

143 

76 

105 

27 

176 

69 

104 

7 

126 

83 

104 

4 

132 

79 

104 

3 

122 

94 

104 

21 

141 

74 

103 

19 

150 

80 

103 

5 

124 

80 

103 

18 

132 

61 

103 

37 

185 

73 

103 

11 

139 

73 

102 

3 

105 

99 

102 

20 

155 

58 

101 

Variety. 


Hawkins 

Ozier 

Southern  Hope 

Ellsworth 

Oats 

Cochran 

Eureka 

Chambers 

Ethridge 

Hays  China 

Jowers 

Willis 

Cherry  Long  Staple . 
Jones  Long  Staple . . . 

Peeler 

Petit  Gulf 

Okra 

Allen 

Bolivar  County 

Barneses 

Zellner 

Cobweb 

East 

Cherry  Cluster 

Matthews .. 

Colthorp  Pride 

Cook 

Six  Oaks 

Wonderful 


tw 

ti 

a 

a 

11 

a 

s 

& 

tt 

N 

34 

148 

57 

17 

119 

45 

34 

139 

68 

8 

125 

54 

7 

120 

05 

6 

130 

76 

9 

140 

78 

3 

101 

89 

3 

117 

68 

5 

114 

84 

11 

128 

76 

3 

112 

72 

14 

132 

74 

26 

136 

57 

8 

108 

81 

15 

132 

46 

28 

124 

67 

34 

144 

52 

3 

116 

83 

6 

105 

83 

9 

105 

44 

5 

103 

87 

3 

113 

75 

13 

123 

55 

6 

111 

62 

3 

99 

71 

12 

123 

56 

4 

126 

57 

4 

113 

44 

101 

100 


98 
98 

97 
97 
97 
97 
97 
00 
96 
06 
96 
95 
94 
91 
94 
04 
93 
92 
90 
8S 
87 
85 
82 

yo 


CULTIVATED    VARIETIES    OF    COTTON. 


221 


It  should  be  remembered  that  the  table  above  refers  to  the  relative 
yield  of  lint  only,  and  does  not  bear  on  the  value  of  the  lint.  The 
figures  have  been  compiled  from  the  results  secured  at  8  different 
experiment  stations  during  seven  years,  and  show  the  wide  variations 
which  may  occur  with  any  variety  when  grown  in  different  localities 
and  in  different  seasons,  and  illustrate  very  forcibly  the  statement 
made  on  a  previous  page  that  no  one  variety  can  be  regarded  as  being 
the  best  for  all  soils  and  for  all  seasons.  Of  the  varieties  which  have 
been  tested  25  or  more  times,  so  that  their  relative  values  may  be 
regarded  as  being  fairly  well  known,  Peterkin,  King,  and  Truitt  Pre- 
mium take  the  highest  rank,  followed  closely  by  Peerless  and  Texas 
Storm  Proof.  Of  these,  Peterkin,  Texas  Storm  Proof,  and  Truitt  have 
a  staple  of  less  than  25  mm.,  while  King  and  Peerless  have  a  staple  of 
from  25  to  30  mm.  King,  Peerless,  and  Truitt  yield  from  30  to  34  per 
cent  of  lint,  and  the  other  two — Peterkin  and  Texas  Storm  Proof — 
yield  more  than  34  per  cent.  It  is  also  significant  that  the  5  varieties 
at  the  bottom  of  the  list  are  all  long-staple  sorts,  which  produce  less 
than  30  per  cent  of  lint.  As  the  table  has  been  made  up  from  the 
results  secured  at  stations  in  both  the  northern  and  the  southern  parts 
of  the  cotton  belt,  it  is  possibly  misleading  in  that  it  does  not  show 
what  varieties  have  given  the  best  results  at  either  extreme,  but  it 
probably  indicates  very  closely  the  relative  standing  of  the  different 
varieties  in  the  central  belt.  Of  the  5  varieties  named  2  are  early,  1 
is  medium,  and  2  are  late  in  time  of  maturity.  All  are  "short"  or 
"medium"  staple,  but  it  should  be  noted  that  there  is  no  experiment 
station  located  in  what  is  known  as  the  "Delta"  country  along  the 
Mississippi  Eiver,  the  region  which  is  universally  recognized  as  being 
best  adapted  to  the  growth  of  the  long-staple  varieties. 

As  showing  how  yields  may  vary,  even  in  a  single  locality,  the  fol- 
lowing table  is  given  from  the  results  secured  in  the  work  of  five  years 
at  the  South  Carolina  Station,  where  the  same  varieties  were  used 
continuously;  the  figures  indicate  the  relative  rank  as  regards  yield  of 
each  variety : 1 

Relative  rank  as  regards  yield  of  different  varieties. 


Variety. 


Peterkin 

Jones  Unproved  .. 
Dickson  Improved 

Cobweb 

Thomas 

New  Texas 

Ozier 

Common 

Duncan 

Richardson 

Dickson  Cluster.. 

Hays  China 

Crawford  Peerless 


Average. 


1  South  Carolina  Sta.  Rpt.  1888,  p.  218. 


222 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


These  variations  are  nearly  or  quite  as  great  as  when  the  cottons  are 
grown  in  different  States,  as  may  be  seen  by  the  following  table,  show- 
ing the  relative  rank  as  regards  yield  of  eleven  varieties,  grown  in  four 
different  States  as  reported  by  the  Arkansas  Station:1 

Iielative  rank  as  regards  yield  of  different  varieties. 


Variety. 


Peerless 

Shine  Early 

Mammoth  Prolific 

Hawkins 

Deering 

Herlong 

Allen 

Jones  Long  Staple 

Peterkin 

Southern  Hope  . . . 
Truitt  Premium  . . 


Arkansas. 

Georgia. 

Louisiana. 

1 

5 

3 

2 
3 
4 

8 

6 

2 

4 

5 
6 

4 

5 

7 

7 

6 

8 

9 

2 

9 

1 

1 

10 
11 

8 
3 

7 

Mississippi. 


The  Alabama  College  Station  reports2  as  a  result  of  examinations 
of  25  varieties  that  the  strongest  cotton  fibers  were  produced  by  Truitt, 
the  largest  by  Barnet,  the  smallest  by  No.  1  (Peerless),  Hawkins 
Improved,  and  Peterkin,  the  longest  by  Okra  Leaf,  the  shortest  by 
No.  2  (Peerless),  and  the  best  twisted  by  Truitt,  Eameses,  and  Cherry 
Cluster ;  the  largest  j>ercentage  of  fiber  per  boll  was  produced  by  Wel- 
born  Pet,  Okra  Leaf,  Peterkin,  Hawkins  Improved,  ami  King  Improved, 
in  the  order  named  ;  the  largest  percentage  of  seed  per  boll  was  pro- 
duced by  Zellner,  Eameses,  Southern  Hope,  and  Truitt,  in  the  order 
named;  and  the  best  grade  of  cotton,  taking  all  things  into  considera- 
tion, is  Cherry  Cluster,  the  second  best  Truitt. 

Alabama  Canebrake  Station,  in  reporting  a  test  of  13  varieties,  says:3 
"Peerless  and  Welborn  were  the  best  types  of  cluster  cotton.  The 
greatest  yield  was  made  by  Peerless,  Peterkin,  and  Texas  Storm  and 
Drought  Proof."  The  same  station,  in  reporting  tests  of  15  varieties  in 
1891,  says:  "Peterkin  and  Peerless  are  the  most  desirable  varieties." 

The  directions  in  which  we  must  look  for  a  further  improvement  in 
varieties  will  vary  somewhat  with  the  latitude  where  the  crop  is  to  be 
grown.  In  order  to  be  desirable  for  any  locality  the  crop  must  mature 
before  the  plants  are  killed  by  frost,  so  that,  at  least  for  the  northern 
cotton  belt,  it  is  essential  that  complete  and  early  maturity  be  secured. 
No  variety  which  does  not  mature  fully  three-fourths  of  its  crop  before 
the  first  of  October  should  be  grown  north  of  latitude  32°,  and  even 
south  of  that  region  early  maturity  is  desirable  as  enabling  the  crop  to 
escape  probable  injury  and  loss  from  October  storms,  though  it  is  not 
as  essential  as  farther  north. 

Individual  plants  of  any  variety  differ  from  each  other  so  widely  that 
it  is  an  easy  matter  to  select  certain  ones  which  have  characteristics 

1  Arkansas  Sta.  Bui.  18. 

2  Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  13  (11.  ser.). 

3  Alabama  Canebrake  Sta.  Buls.  11  and  14. 


CULTIVATED    VARIETIES    OF    COTTON.  223 

making-  them  more  desirable  than  are  the  majority  of  those  in  the  same 
field.  An  ideal  plant  should  be  vigorous  in  its  growth  and  wholly  free 
from  disease.  The  branches  should  be  sufficiently  strong  and  rigid,  so 
that  when  they  are  loaded  with  green  bolls  they  will  not  touch  the 
ground.  There  is  a  great  diversity  of  opinion  as  to  the  relative  pro- 
ductiveness of  the  "cluster"  and  the  "limbed"  varieties,  both  styles  of 
growth  having  their  warm  supporters.  Many  planters  claim  that  the 
cluster  or  short-limbed  varieties  are  best  on  deep  and  rich  soil,  while 
the  longer-limbed  sorts  are  superior  for  lighter  soils.  The  results  which 
have  been  secured  in  a  large  number  of  comparative  tests,  however, 
do  not  seem  to  show  any  foundation  for  this  opinion,  and  indicate  that 
the  differences,  if  any,  are  attributable  to  other  reasons  than  the  mere 
length  of  the  limbs.  The  short-limbed  and  cluster  sorts  can  be  planted 
more  closely  than  can  those  varieties  having  longer  and  more  spread- 
ing branches,  but  usually  have  smaller  bolls,  and  none  of  the  cluster 
varieties  produce  a  long  staple.  Many  of  the  cluster  varieties  have 
sharp  points  to  the  bolls,  which  make  them  unpleasant  to  pick,  though 
this  objection  does  not  apply  to  all.  Most  of  the  cluster  varieties 
mature  early,  though  none  of  them  mature  as  early  as  do  some  of  the 
medium  and  short-limbed  sorts,  and  a  few  mature  quite  late.  The 
general  results  of  the  tests  made  show  the  cluster  varieties  to  be  better 
adapted  for  cultivation  in  the  middle  and  southern  cotton  region  than 
ill  the  extreme  northern  belt.  The  bolls  should  be  of  good  size,  and  a 
cross  section  should  show  a  circle  and  not  a  triangle  with  rounded 
corners.  When  mature  they  should  point  downward  rather  than 
upward,  so  that  rain  and  heavy  dews  will  not  enter  and  rot  the  con- 
tents; and  they  should  also  open  widely  enough  to  permit  easy  pick- 
ing, but  not  enough  to  allow  the  seed  cotton  to  drop  to  the  ground.  It 
is  of  no  advantage  to  have  more  than  three  or  four  divisions  or  "locks" 
in  a  boll,  as  when  spherical  in  shape,  and  with  a  given  diameter,  its 
contents  can  be  no  greater  in  six  sections  than  in  three.  The  bracts 
at  the  base  of  the  boll  should  be  small,  so  that  they  will  not  be  in  the 
way  and  become  entangled  with  the  seed  cotton  in  picking.  The  lint 
should  be  pure  white  in  color,  strong,  even,  silky,  uniform  in  length 
and  twist,  and  should  be  easily  separated  from  the  seed  in  ginning. 
The  staple  should  be  not  less  than  25  mm.  in  length,  and  if  30  mm.  can 
be  secured  it  will  be  still  better,  though  it  will  not  be  advisable  to 
sacrifice  a  larger  yield  for  a  longer  staple  so  long  as  the  present  rela- 
tive prices  of  the  long  and  short  staples  are  maintained. 

With  early  maturity  and  a  medium  length  of  staple  secured,  the  only 
additional  feature  which  need  be  considered  is  how  to  secure  the 
greatest  possible  yield  of  lint  per  acre.  It  is  often  claimed  that  the 
larger  the  percentage  of  lint  to  seed  cotton  the  more  valuable  the  variety. 
This  belief  has  no  foundation  in  fact,  and  is  really  the  reverse  of  true, 
provided  the  total  yield  of  liut  per  acre  remains  the  same.  A  crop  of 
500  pounds  of  lint  and  1,100  pounds  of  seed  per  acre  is  certainly  more 


224  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

valuable  than  the  same  crop  of  lint  with  only  900  pounds  of  seed.  At 
present  prices  the  seed  is  an  important  part  of  the  crop,  and  if  the 
yield  can  be  increased  without  detriment  to  the  total  yield  of  lint  it 
will  add  just  that  much  to  the  value  of  the  entire  crop.  In  speaking 
of  this  matter  the  Georgia  Station  says : ' 

It  maybe  said  by  way  of  caution  tbat  tberc  is  no  necessary  relation  between  the 
yield  of  lint  per  100  pounds  of  seed  cotton  and  the  actual  yield  of  lint  per  acre.  A 
variety  may  yield  a  high  percentage  of  lint,  calculated  on  a  giveu  weight  of  seed 
cotton,  and  yet  yield  less  lint  per  acre  than  another  variety.  It  is  probably  more  a 
question  of  seed  than  of  lint.  As  the  seed  contains  nearly  all  of  the  valuable  ele- 
ments taken  from  the  soil,  it  is  but  reasonable  to  expect  that  a  large  yield  of  seed 
per  acre  will  be  attended  by  a  correspondingly  large  yield  of  lint.  We  have  but 
little  doubt  that  some  varieties  that  are  popular  with  the  mass  of  farmers  because 
of  their  percentage  of  lint  compared  to  seed  simply  produce  less  seed  per  acre  instead 
of  more  lint  per  acre.  It  remains  true,  however,  that  a  small-seeded  variety — small 
in  size  and  small  in  percentage  of  the  whole — is  better  for  poor  land  and  low  culture 
than  a  A^ariety  having  a  naturally  large  seed  and  a  smaller  percentage  of  lint. 

It  is  a  well-established  fact  that  large  seeds  will  produce  stronger 
and  more  vigorous  plants  than  small  seeds  of  the  same  variety.  Cotton 
is  no  exception  to  the  rule,  and  if  bred  to  produce  small  seeds  it  will  be 
at  the  expense  of  the  size,  vigor,  and  health  of  the  plant.  A  heavy 
yield  of  good  lint  is  the  main  object  to  be  attained,  but  this  will  not 
necessarily  follow  from  a  decrease  in  the  size  of  the  seed.  Of  course,  the 
planter  can  not  afford  to  increase  the  percentage  of  seed  at  the  expense 
of  the  lint,  but  if  the  pounds  of  lint  per  acre  can  be  maintained  the 
greater  the  amount  of  seed  the  greater  will  be  the  profit.  Whether 
or  not  the  weight  of  seed  can  safely  be  increased  without  a  decrease  in 
the  yield  of  lint  is  a  matter  which  has  received  almost  no  attention,  but 
which  is  a  promising  field  for  the  investigator. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

Tenth  Census  of  the  United  States,  vols.  5  and  6.     Cotton  Production,  parts  1  and  2. 

Cotton  Planter's  Manual,  Lyman. 

Dictionary  of  Economic  Plants,  Watt. 

Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  4, 1888;  Bui.  5,  n.  s.,  1889;    Buls.  12, 16,  n.  s.,  1890;  Buls.22, 

23,n.s.,  1891;  Bui.  52,  1894;  Alabama  Canebrake  Bui.  7, 1890;  Bui.  11, 1891;  Bui. 

14, 1892. 
Arkansas  Sta.  Bui.  18;  Repts.  1888,  1889, 1890. 
GeorgiaSta.Bul.il;  Bui.  16;  Bui.  20;  Bui.  24. 
Louisiana  Stas.  Bui.  13;  Buls.  21,  22;  Buls.  26, 27;  Buls.  7, 8,  2d  ser.;  Buls.  16, 17, 2d 

ser. ;  Buls.  21,  22,  2d  ser. ;  Buls.  28,  29,  2d  ser. 
Mississippi  Sta.  Bui.  18;  Bui.  23;  Rpts.  1889, 1890, 1891, 1892, 1893. 
North  Carolina  Sta.  Rpt.  1887. 

South  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  1,  n.  s. ;  Bui.  2,  n.  s. ;  Rpts.  1888, 1889. 
Texas  Sta.  Rept.  1889. 

1  Georgia  Sta.  Bui.  20. 


CULTURE  OF  COTTON. 

By  Harry  Hammond. 
GEOGRAPHY    OF    THE    COTTON   BELT. 

The  cotton  belt  covers  24°  of  longitude  and  10°  of  latitude.  Exclud- 
ing from  the  count  the  greater  part  of  Virginia,  more  than  100,000 
square  miles  of  western  Texas,  and  the  whole  of  Kentucky,  Kansas, 
Missouri,  Utah,  California,  Arizona,  and  New  Mexico,  in  all  of  which 
cotton  has  been  cultivated  and  where  a  larger  demand  might  cause 
its  culture  to  be  extended,  the  cotton-growing  region  measures  nearly 
600,000  square  miles,  almost  one-third  of  the  total  area  of  settlement, 
in  1890,  of  the  United  States.  The  20,000,000  acres  planted  in  cotton 
occupies  barely  5  acres  in  every  100  of  this  extensive  region.  Scarcely 
50  per  cent  of  this  territory  is  in  farms,  and  not  more  than  one-fifth  has 
at  any  time  been  tilled.  This  section  contained  in  1890  a  population 
of  over  8,000,000  whites  and  something  over  5,000,000  negroes,  in  all 
13,651,000,  every  100  of  them  producing  53  bales  of  cotton,  an  average 
of  254  pounds  of  lint  per  capita. 

The  Mississippi  Eiver,  turned  from  its  southeasterly  course  to  one 
south  of  west  by  the  bluff  lauds  of  Tennessee,  Mississippi,  and  Louisi- 
ana, divides  the  cotton  belt  into  two  nearly  equal  eastern  and  western 
portions.  Bordering  the  west  of  the  flood  plain  of  the  great  river  are 
the  oak  and  hickory  uplands  of  Arkansas,  Louisiana,  and  Texas, 
stretching  westward  more  than  200  miles  to  the  black  Cretaceous  prai- 
ries of  Texas.  These  black  prairies  descend  from  Indian  Territory  in 
a  broad  crescent,  its  concave  edge  facing  west  and  inclosing  the  more 
elevated  red-loam  prairies  until  it  thins  out  into  the  coast  prairies  of 
the  southwest  in  the  neighborhood  of  Austin.  To  the  north  the  oak 
and  hickory  is  bounded  by  the  red  lands  of  Arkansas.  The  counter- 
parts of  these  regions  are  found  east  of  the  Mississippi.  Moving  east 
from  the  bluff  and  yellow-loam  table-lands  that  rise  from  the  flood  plain 
of  the  river,  we  again  meet  the  oak  and  hickory  lands  in  Mississippi  and 
Alabama.  Beyond  these  another  crescent  of  black  Cretaceous  prai- 
ries, its  concave  edge,  however,  facing  east,  reaches  from  northwestern 
Mississippi  to  southeastern  Alabama.  Northeast  from  the  concave 
border  of  these  prairies  lie  the  valley  lands  of  Alabama,  Georgia,  and 
Tennessee,  the  Coal  Measures  of  those  States,  the  gravelly  hills  of  Ala- 
bama, and  the  central  basin  of  Tennessee.  Near  the  termination  of 
these  prairies  in  southeastern  Alabama  another  region  is  encountered. 
1993— No.  33 15  225 


226  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

This  is  a  prolongation  of  the  Alleghanies,  and  passes  from  the  local- 
ity named,  in  a  broad  belt,  to  the  northeast,  across  the  States  of  Ala- 
bama, Georgia,  South  Carolina  and  North  Carolina.  It  is  known  as  the 
metamorphic  or  Piedmont  region,  or,  in  popular  parlance,  as  the  region 
of  granitic  rocks.  On  the  northeastern  border  of  this  region,  in  North 
Carolina,  the  pine  hills  are  met.  The  pine-hills  region  reaches  south- 
westward  along  the  southern  border  of  the  Piedmont  region  and  the 
Alabama  and  Mississippi  prairies,  traversing  all  the  Atlantic  and  Gulf 
States,  interrupted  only  by  the  delta  of  the  Mississippi,  until  it  crosses 
Louisiana  and  reaches  the  oak  and  hickory  of  Texas.  South  of  the 
pine-hills  region  is  a  broad  belt  of  level  pine  lands,  coextensive  with 
it  and  everywhere  touching  either  the  Atlantic  or  the  Gulf  coasts, 
until  it  reaches  the  coast  prairies  of  Louisiana  and  Texas,  where  it 
terminates. 

In  1801  South  Carolina  led  the  other  States  in  the  production  of  cot- 
ton. In  1850  Alabama  stood  first  in  the  amount  produced.  Mississippi 
led  in  1860-1880,  and  Texas  stood  first  in  this  respect  in  1890. 

CENTERS  OF  COTTON  PRODUCTION. 

The  center  of  cotton  production,  the  point  where  the  weight  of  all  the 
cotton  produced  in  the  various  regions  of  the  cotton  belt  would  stand 
in  equilibrium,  was  located  in  1850  a  few  miles  north  of  Montgomery, 
Ala.  In  1860  this  center  had  moved  200  miles  west  to  a  point  some  20 
miles  northeast  from  Jackson,  Miss.  Its  movement  in  1870  was  north- 
east to  a  point  near  Carthage,  Leake  County,  Miss.  It  again  moved 
northeastward  into  Noxubee  County,  Miss.,  in  1880.  Its  movement 
was  about  GO  miles  northwest  in  1890  to  Kosciusko,  in  Attala  County, 
in  the  same  State.  It  is  probable  that  since  that  date  the  increasing 
crops  of  Arkansas,  northern  Texas,  and  Indian  Territory  have  drawn 
the  center  of  cotton  production  still  farther  to  the  northwest. 

THE   PINE  LEVELS. 

These  extend  inland  from  the  Atlantic  and  Gulf  coasts  for  from  50  to 
150  miles  and  reach  an  elevation  of  some  200  feet  above  sea  level, 
embracing  an  area  of  34,000,000  acres.  Forty- four  per  cent  of  this  area 
is  in  farms.  Eight  per  cent  was  improved  land  in  1890,  being  an  increase 
from  6  per  cent  in  1880.  Only  1  per  cent  of  these  lands  was  planted  in 
cotton  iu  1880,  but  double  that  amount  was  put  in  in  1890.  They  pro- 
duced 2.G  and  3.2  per  cent  of  the  total  cotton  crop  at  the  beginning  and 
close  of  the  eleventh  decade,  respectively.  The  cotton  acreage  was 
increased  during  this  period  57  per  cent  and  the  cotton  crop  62  per  cent. 
This  was  of  exceptional  occurrence,  for  it  almost  always  happens  that 
an  increase  in  acreage  is  not  accompanied  by  a  proportional  increase  in 
the  yield.  Both  these  increments  were  considerably  greater  than  the 
increase  of  the  population,  which  was  only  22  per  cent.  Nevertheless, 
the  pine  levels  are  not  given  as  exclusively  to  cotton  growing  as  most  of 


TJ.  S.  Dept.  of  Agriculture,  Expt.  Sta.  Bui.  33. 


Plate  III. 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON.  227 

the  cotton  belt  is ;  for  while  the  average  product  per  capita  of  the  cotton 
belt  was  231  pounds  of  lint  cotton  in  1880  and  259  in  1890,  only  85 
pounds  of  lint  per  capita  was  produced  in  1880  by  the  inhabitants  of 
the  pine  levels,  increasing  in  1890  to  99  pounds.  This  was  not  due  to 
lack  of  fertility  in  the  soil,  for  the  product  per  acre  was  equal  to,  and 
in  instances  greater,  than  some  of  the  other  cotton  regions,  and  it  only 
required  in  1890  two-tenths  of  an  acre  more  than  the  average  of  the 
cotton  belt  to  produce  a  bale  of  cotton  here,  which,  considering  the 
very  easy  tillage  of  these  light  sandy  loams  m  comparison  with  most 
others,  did  not  appreciably  increase  the  cost  of  production.  The  yield 
was  a  bale  to  3.1  acres  in  1880  and  a  bale  to  2,9  acres  in  1890. 

A  white  population  preponderates  in  61  of  the  89  counties  consti- 
tuting this  region.  The  only  State  in  which  the  negro  population  is 
in  excess  is  South  Carolina,  where  they  were  settled  long  ago  upon  the 
fertile  rice  fields  and  the  sea  islands,  producing  long  staple  silk  cotton. 
The  colored  population  was  only  19  per  cent  of  the  population  in  this 
region  in  1880  and  25  per  cent  in  1890.  That  75  per  cent  of  the  popula- 
tion here  is  white  is  an  observation  running  counter  to  the  generally 
received  opinion  that  the  moist,  warm  climate  of  the  low  latitudes  is 
unfavorable  to  the  white  man,  and  that  nature  intended  them  for  the 
black  race.  An  observation  of  a  similar  character  in  regard  to  the 
work  animals  employed  in  agriculture  will  have  to  be  changed.  The 
mule  has  been  thought  especially  fitted  for  work  in  low  latitudes,  and 
the  South  generally  has  maintained  this  barren  stock  at  heavy  cost. 
Here,  in  the  lowest  latitude,  the  number  of  horses  exceeds  that  of 
mules  in  76  out  of  the  89  counties  in  the  pine  levels  and  coast  region, 
even  where  the  colored  race  preponderates,  they  being  supposed  to 
prefer  the  mule. 

The  farms  here  are  larger  than  anywhere  else  in  the  cotton  belt, 
averaging  233  acres  to  the  farm  in  1880,  and  190  acres  in  1890,  against  a 
general  average  for  the  cotton  belt  of  119  acres  to  the  farm.  Sixty-nine 
per  cent  of  these  farms  are  occupied  and  worked  by  their  owners,  only 
31  per  cent  being  rented,  in  which  regard  this  region  again  offers  a 
striking  contrast  to  the  remainder  of  the  cotton  belt. 

The  tillage  of  these  lands  is  easy.  The  average  is  37  acres  of 
improved  land  to  the  work  animal  as  against  22  for  the  whole  cotton 
belt.  Three  bales  for  each  work  animal  is  the  average,  which  is  also 
high,  the  average  for  the  cotton  belt  being  2.1  bales. 

The  great  agricultural  need  of  the  pine  levels  is  drainage,  and  this, 
under  the  increasing  subdivisions  of  the  farms,  has  not  received  proper 
attention,  and  in  fact  it  has  not  been  practicable  to  drain  the  land 
properly.  Owing  to  their  immense  areas  of  swamp  land,  their  rich 
vegetable  mold,  resting  on  marl  or  phosphate  rock,  has  remained 
untouched.  The  general  culture  of  cotton  is  otherwise  essentially  the 
same  as  that  to  be  described  in  the  pine-hills  region.  There  are, 
however,  two  notable  exceptions — the  culture  of  Sea  Island  cotton  in 


228  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

South  Carolina  and  Georgia,  and  of  the  same  cotton  in  the  interior  of 
Georgia — which  should  have  special  mention. 

Culture  of  Sea  Island  cotton. — On  the  sea  islands  of  South  Carolina 
field  labor  is  performed  almost  exclusively  by  negroes.  Xearly  all  of 
them  are  engaged  in  farming  on  their  own  account;  a  large  number  own 
farms;  a  still  larger  number  rent  lands  for  cultivation,  and  even  the 
laborers  are  paid  most  generally  by  granting  them  the  use  of  so  many 
acres  of  land  for  certain  stipulated  services.  The  largest  number  of 
acres  of  Sea  Island  cotton  planted  under  one  management  scarcely 
anywhere  exceeds  100  acres.  The  white  planters  do  not  average  prob- 
ably more  than  30  acres,  and  this  requires  that  they  should  be  land- 
lords of  considerable  estates;  for,  as  the  laborers  are  frequently  given 
5  to  7  acres  for  two  days'  work  in  the  week,  and  as  two  days'  work  per 
week  does  not  suffice  for  the  cultivation  of  more  than  4  acres,  to  culti- 
vate 30  acres  of  cotton  under  this  system  requires  in  addition  75  acres 
of  land;  add  to  this  the  amount  usually  planted  in  corn  and  other 
crops,  and  we  will  have  120  acres.  As,  under  the  best  system,  the  land 
lies  fallow  every  other  year,  the  planter  of  30  acres  of  cotton  will 
require  210  acres  of  open  land;  and  as  scarcely  one-fifth  of  the  land  is 
under  cultivation,  such  a  planter  will  probably  own  1,200  acres.  This 
state  of  things  is  owing  to  the  scarcity  of  capital,  and  to  the  low  price 
of  land  and  labor. 

Drainage,  although  said  by  Governor  Seabrooke  to  be  so  little  attended 
to,  has  of  necessity  always  been  practiced  to  some  extent  on  the  sea 
islands.  The  remarkably  high  beds  on  which  the  cotton  is  planted 
here — 18  inches  to  2  feet  high — subserve  this  purpose.  The  best 
planters  have  long  had  open  drains  in  their  fields.  These  were  gener- 
ally made  by  running  two  furrows  with  a  plow  and  afterwards  hauling 
the  loose  dirt  out  with  a  hoe,  thus  leaving  an  open  ditch,  if  it  may  be 
so  termed,  a  foot  or  more  in  depth.  In  recent  years  the  farmers  of 
James  Island  have  made  deeper  ditches  and  placed  plank  drains  in 
them.  Seeing  the  great  benefit  resulting  from  this,  they  subsequently 
replaced  the  plank  with  regular  drainage  tile.  The  outlets  open  on  the 
sea  at  the  low- water  mark,  and  the  pressure  of  the  water  on  the  pipes 
preserves  a  constant  outflow,  even  at  high  tide.  In  this  manner,  land 
only  1  or  2  feet  above  high  water  is  susceptible  of  thorough  drainage  to 
the  depth  of  4  and  even  of  5  feet.  The  borders  of  these  islands  being 
usually  the  highest  part  and  the  richest  land  in  the  interior  often 
much  lower,  a  wide  field  for  improvement  is  offered  in  this  direction. 

In  the  early  part  of  the  century,  when  agriculture  had  so  far  devel- 
oped the  value  of  these  lands  as  to  make  $60  an  acre  a  not  unusual 
price,  the  use  of  the  plow  was  entirely  unknown  here  and  all  the  opera- 
tions of  tdlage  were  performed  by  hand  with  the  hoe  alone.  This  con- 
tinued to  be  the  usual  practice  until  1865.  Since  then  plows  have  come 
more  and  more  into  use,  until  their  employment  became  quite  general. 

Fallowing  is  practiced  to  the  extent  that  land  planted  in  cotton  one 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON.  229 

year  is  pastured  the  next  by  cattle  and  sheep  but  not  by  hogs,  and  it 
is  claimed  that  great  benefit  is  derived  by  having  the  loose  soil  of  these 
islands  thus  trodden  by  stock  during  the  year  they  lie  fallow.  The 
rapid  growth  of  bushes,  briers,  and  weeds  is  kept  down  by  the  stock, 
and  the  large  growth  of  cotton  stalks  of  the  previous  year,  after  fur- 
nishing food  for  the  animals,  is  broken  up  and  scattered.  If  care  be 
taken  "that  the  grass  is  not  eaten  so  close  as  to  expose  the  soil  on  the 
top  of  the  beds  to  the  summer  sun,"  it  is  found  when  the  stock  is 
turned  off  in  November  to  range  through  the  cultivated  fields  that  the 
pasture  uis  in  exactly  the  right  condition  for  the  coming  season's  cotton 
fields,  with  no  cotton  stalks  or  troublesome  growth  to  be  got  off  or 
under  the  land  and  make  it  too  husky." 

A  mule  can  do  the  plowing  required  in  the  cultivation  of  30  acres  of 
Sea  Island  cotton,  and  can,  in  addition,  cultivate  a  sufficiency  of  land 
to  supply  corn  for  its  own  feed.  The  first  step  in  the  preparation  of 
the  land  is  to  hoe  off  the  weeds  ("hurricane"),  cut  up  the  cotton  stalks, 
and  pile  and  burn  this  litter.  This  costs  40  cents  an  acre.  Bushes  are 
grubbed  up  at  7  cents  an  acre.  The  land  is  not  thoroughly  plowed, 
but  in  February  two  furrows  are  run  with  a  single-horse  turning  plow 
in  the  middles  between  the  old  beds,  leaving  a  trench  7  or  8  inches 
deep.  In  this  furrow  a  subsoil  plow  may  or  may  not  be  run,  according 
to  the  character  of  the  soil — whether  wet  or  dry.  On  James  Island, 
where  underdrainage  is  practiced,  this  furrow  is  generally  used. 
Before  plows  came  into  use  this  trench  was  never  made,  and  even 
now  it  is  omitted  by  some  of  the  most  successful  planters.  In  this 
trench,  or  in  the  middle  of  the  alley  when  no  trench  is  made,  the 
manure  is  placed.  This  consists  usually  of  20  cart  loads  of  marsh  mud 
and  1,000  to  1,400  pounds  of  cottou  seed  to  the  acre.  Stable  and  lot 
manure,  together  with  compost  of  marsh  mud,  are  also  applied  at  the 
rate  of  40  cart  loads  to  the  acre  on  such  portion  of  the  land  as  the  lim- 
ited number  of  stock  belonging  to  the  farmer  enables  him  to  treat  in 
this  manner.  On  the  lines  of  manure  thus  laid  down  a  certain  quantity 
of  commercial  fertilizers  is  drilled.  This  practice,  formerly  unknown, 
is  very  common  now,  even  the  smallest  negro  farmers  often  going 
heavily  in  debt  to  obtain  these  fertilizers.  The  land  is  now  ready  for 
listing,  which  is  done  by  hauling  the  soil  from  the  top  and  sides  of  the 
old  beds  onto  the  manure  with  a  hoe.  A  more  recent  practice  is  to 
lap  in  with  two  furrows  of  a  turning  plow  on  the  manure.  This  last 
costs  only  17£  cents  per  acre,  while  the  listing  with  the  hoe  costs  SO 
cents,  although  the  latter  has  the  advantage  of  bringing  all  the  humus 
and  vegetable  mold  directly  to  the  spot  where  the  roots  of  the  plant 
are  to  grow.  Over  the  mass  of  dirt,  weeds,  manure,  etc.,  thus  collected 
in  the  old  alley  a  double  roller  5  feet  from  center  to  center  and  weigh- 
ing about  800  pounds  is  passed  to  press  together  and  compact  the  whole, 
completing  two  rows  at  a  time.  All  this  should  be  finished  by  the  first 
to  the  middle  of  March,  and  the  bed  is  then  built  up  by  lapping  in  two 
more  furrows  on  a  side  with  a  single  or  double  horse  turning  plow. 


230  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

The  land  is  now  ready  for  planting,  which  may  begin  any  time  after 
March  20,  but  April  1  to  10  is  the  time  preferred.  Cotton  planters  are 
not  generally  used.  Three  laborers  do  this  work ;  the  one  ahead  chox)S  a 
hole  with  a  hoe,  on  the  top  of  the  bed,  at  intervals  of  12  to  IS  inches; 
another  drops  eight  or  ten  seed  in  each  hole,  and  a  third  follows  ami  covers 
carefully  with  the  hoe.  Three  to  four  pecks  of  seed  are  used  to  the  acre. 
The  seed  makes  its  appearance  above  ground  in  eight  to  twelve  days 
after  it  is  planted,  and  the  stand  is  perfected  from  the  second  week  in 
April  to  the  first  week  in  May.  Hoeing  begins  about  the  first  of  May. 
The  second  hoeing  takes  place  the  last  of  May.  The  plows  then  break 
out  the  middles  (the  spaces  between  the  new  beds  where  the  old  beds 
stood).  The  hoe  hands  follow  and  pull  up  the  loose  dirt  left  by  the 
plows  to  the  foot  of  the  cotton.  This  is  called  u  hauling,''  and  by  it  the 
new  bed  is  completed,  the  cotton  is  kept  from  "flagging"  (falling  down), 
and  the  grass  is  kept  under.  It  costs  80  cents  an  acre.  At  the  second 
hoeing  some  stalks  are  thinned  from  the  bunch  in  which  the  seed 
breaks  the  ground,  and  at  each  succeeding  hoeing  and  hauling  other 
stalks  are  removed  until  in  July  only  one  stalk  of  each  bunch  is  left. 
There  are  four  hoeings  and  four  haulings,  one  or  more  furrows  with 
a  sweep  being  run  through  the  middles  previous  to  each  hauling.  By 
the  last  of  July  the  culture  is  completed,  except  to  run  a  furrow  between 
the  rows  in  August  to  destroy  the  grass  and  keep  the  cotton  growing. 

The  first  blossoms  appear  about  the  middle  of  June,  when  the  cotton 
is  15  inches  high,  and  the  bolls  open  in  August,  when  the  plants  have 
attained  a  growth  of  4  to  5  feet.  Cotton  picking  commences  from  the 
last  week  in  August  to  the  first  week  in  September.  By  the  15th 
of  December  the  crop  is  gathered. 

When  the  cotton  has  been  picked,  weighed,  and  housed,  it  is  next 
spread  out  in  the  sun  on  what  is  called  an  "  arbor."  This  is  a  platform 
25  feet  or  more  square  made  usually  of  inch  boards.  Here  the  sun  and 
air  dry  the  cotton,  preventing  it  from  heating,  which  it  is  liable  to  do 
when  stored  in  bulk,  and,  it  is  also  thought,  causes  the  lint  to  absorb  some 
of  the  oil  in  the  seed,  which  adds  to  the  silky  luster  of  the  fiber.  After 
being  thus  dried,  it  may  be  either  stored  or  passed  "at  once  to  the  whipper, 
a  machine  that  knocks  the  dust  and  sand  out  and  leaves  the  cotton 
whiter  and  more  open.  Formerly  it  was  all  assorted.  A  hand  was 
given  150  pounds  of  seed  cotton  as  a  day's  task,  which  he  thoroughly 
overhauled,  picking  out  all  specks,  stained  cotton,  fragments  of  leaf, 
etc.  At  present,  however,  this  is  usually  done  by  two  hands,  who 
examine  the  cotton  as  it  passes  to  the  gin,  and  two  others  behind  the 
gin,  who  pick  out  cracked  seed,  motes,  etc.,  as  the  lint  issues  from  the 
gin.  The  roller  gin  in  some  form  has  always  been  and  still  is  used  for 
detaching  the  lint  from  this  black  seed  cotton. 

The  first  successful  crop  of  Sea  Isfcind  cotton  was  grown  by  William 
Elliott  on  Hilton  Head  in  1790.  In  1S05  this  quality  of  cotton  sold  for 
30  cents  per  pound,  while  uplands  were  selling  at  22  cents;  in  1816  at 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON.  231 

47  ceuts,  with  uplands  at  27  cents.  The  crop  of  1825  amounted  to 
2G,039  bales,  of  which  7,779  were  grown  in  Georgia,  and  the  balance  in 
South  Carolina.  In  that  year  Mr.  Kinsey  Burden,  of  South  Carolina, 
sold  GO  bales  at  $1. 10  per  pound.  The  same  gentleman  sold  his  crop 
of  another  year  for  $1.25  per  pound,  when  the  average  price  of  uplands 
was  9^  cents.  He  also  sold  two  bales  in  1828  at  $2  a  pound,  which  is 
the  highest  price  on  record.  The  crop  of  Sea  Island  rose  to  36,776 
bales  in  1829,  of  which  13,729  were  made  in  Georgia,  and  the  remainder 
on  the  sea  islands  of  South  Carolina.  The  crop  fell  off  in  1839,  South 
Carolina  still  leading  with  9,975  bales,  and  Georgia  making  1,225.  The 
two  States  together  made  20,184  bales  in  1819,  South  Carolina  making 
18,921.  During  the  fifties  this  culture  was  extended  to  Florida,  and 
that  State  produced  nearly  11,000  bales  in  1856.  In  1859  Florida  led 
with  a  crop  of  20,353  bales,  while  South  Carolina  made  13,391  and 
Georgia  10,352.  The  Sea  Island  crop  exceeded  26,000  bales  in  1869 
and  in  1879,  in  both  years  Florida  producing  a  larger  crop.  In  1870 
Texas  contributed  704  bales  of  Sea  Island  cotton,  and  in  1871  made  1,100 
bales;  since  that  date  the  crop  there  has  gradually  dwindled  down  and 
there  is  no  record  of  it  after  1882-83.  In  1889  the  crop  reached  16,841 
bales,  Florida  producing  25,111  bales,  Georgia  12,131  bales,  and  South 
Carolina  9,299.  It  was  about  this  date,  that  this  culture  began  to 
develop  among  the  small  farmers  of  the  pine  levels  at  a  considerable 
distance  inland  from  the  sea.  So  successful  has  this  adventure  proved 
that  in  1894  the  Sea  Island  crop  of  Georgia  rose  to  39,367  bales,  while 
that  of  Florida  fell  to  19,107,  and  South  Carolina,  where  this  culture 
had  originated  and  flourished  longest,  fell  back  to  a  crop  of  2,578.  It 
had  seemed  for  many  years  that  islands  on  the  South  Carolina  coast  pos- 
sessed a  natural  monopoly  for  the  production  of  the  finest  staple.  At 
that  time  the  culture  was  conducted  under  the  superintendence  of  men 
of  high  intelligence,  and  the  selection  of  the  seed  and  the  cultivation  and 
preparation  of  the  crop  for  market  was  attended  to  with  great  skill 
and  the  most  scrupulous  care.  At  present  it  is  chiefly  in  the  hands  of 
small  farmers  of  the  colored  race,  whose  intelligence,  skill,  and  care  are 
wholly  occupied  in  securing  a  bare  subsistence  for  themselves.  It  is 
doubtful  if  there  is  any  local  monopoly  of  the  production  of  long- 
staple  cotton.  It  has  been  grown  successfully  in  the  up  country,  more 
than  100  miles  from  the  coast,  and  all  the  seed  from  which  the  finest 
strains  of  Sea  Island  cotton  have  been  derived  came  from  seed  planted 
in  the  interior  of  South  Carolina,  for  several  years,  during  the  late  war. 
The  extent  to  which  the  manufacture  of  these  long  staples  in  the  United 
States  has  increased  in  recent  years  is  noteworthy:  In  1870  only  5  per 
cent  of  the  crop  was  consumed  in  this  country;  by  1880  the  consump- 
tion had  risen  to  35  per  cent;  and  in  1894,  although  the  crop  had 
increased  130  per  cent,  nearly  40  per  cent  of  it  was  consumed  at  home. 
In  addition  to  that,  a  very  large  amount  of  long-staple  cotton — perhaps 
more  than  10,000  bales — was  imported  from  Egypt  for  manufacture. 


232  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

The  Egyptian  cotton  is  inferior  to  the  finest  grades  of  Carolina  Sea 
Island,  and  it  is  also  inferior  to  the  Santee  and  Florida,  the  growth  of 
which  has  so  greatly  increased  of  late  years.  It  competes  with  the 
long-staple  uplands,  the  cultivation  of  which  was  very  profitable  some 
years  since,  but  which  have  been  almost  entirely  abandoned  owing  to 
being  supplanted  by  imports  from  Egypt. 

The  culture  of  Sea  Island  cotton  in  the  interior  of  Georgia  is  not  so  elab- 
orate as  the  method  described  as  pursued  on  the  coast.  Seed  is  brought 
every  year  from  the  coast  in  quantities  to  plant  patches  sufficient  to  fur- 
nish seed  for  the  whole  crop  the  ensuing  year.  The  seed  of  the  second 
season  is  thought  to  do  better,  but  after  that  the  staple  deteriorates  and 
seed  is  used  which  has  been  planted  away  from  the  coast  only  one  year. 
They  use  a  very  effective  homemade  implement  for  cutting  down  the 
old  stalks.  It  is  a  roller  on  which  iron  blades  are  fastened  longitudi- 
nally. Shafts  are  attached  and  it  is  drawn  by  one  horse  along  one  row  at 
a  time,  cutting  the  stalks  into  lengths  of  8  to  10  inches.  The  general 
culture  resembles  that  of  upland  cotton,  and  is  usually  performed 
entirely  by  the  farmer  and  his  family.  They  raise  their  own  supplies 
and  provisions  to  sell,  such  as  poultry,  eggs,  honey,  and  country-cured 
hams.  Elsewhere  the  falling  off  in  the  long-staple  crops  of  the  coast 
and  Florida  indicates  a  depression  as  great,  or  greater,  in  this  culture  as 
in  any  other  branch  of  agriculture. 

The  average  value  of  farm  lands  in  the  pine  levels  is  lower  than  else- 
where in  the  cotton  belt,  but  it  rose  during  the  eleventh  decade  from 
$2.09  to  $1.01  per  acre,  while  unimproved  land  may  be  bought  for  50 
cents  an  acre. 

Five  per  cent  of  these  lands  in  North  Carolina  are  said  to  produce 
three-fourths  of  a  bale  to  the  acre  without  fertilizers,  20  per  cent  half 
a  bale,  and  50  per  cent  one-third  of  a  bale.  Five  estimates  of  the  cost 
of  production  there  in  1880  ranged  from  5£  cents  per  pound  of  lint  to 
10  cents,  the  average  being  7.3  cents.  Wharton  gives  the  cost  of  the 
crop  of  1891  as  7£  cents  and  of  1892  as  11  cents,  owing  to  unfavorable 
seasons,  and  the  average  for  three  years  as  8  cents.  The  crop  of  Mr. 
Nobles  cost  7  cents  in  1892  and  5£  cents  in  1893,  the  reduced  cost 
resulting  from  diminishing  the  acreage  and  planting  other  crops. 

In  South  Carolina  the  cost  of  growing  Sea  Island  cotton  was  esti- 
mated in  1880  at  from  15  cents  to  21  cents  per  pound  of  lint,  with  a  net 
profit  per  acre  of  $38  to  $78  at  the  prices  then  prevailing.  The  cost  of 
producing  short  staples  in  the  interior  was  placed  then  at  6i  cents; 
estimates  in  1893  give  the  cost  of  short  staple  at  5  cents  on  the  best 
and  10  to  11  cents  per  pound  ou  the  poorest  land. 

In  Georgia  the  cost  of  producing  short  staple  in  the  pine  levels  was 
estimated  iu  1880  at  8  cents  to  10  cents  per  pound;  in  1892  it  is  placed 
at  Ih,  cents.  The  cost  of  growing  Sea  Island  cotton  was  thought  to  be 
50  cents  a  pound  in  1880. 

Iu  the  Alabama  pine  levels  about  1  per  cent  of  the  land  produces, 


CULTURE  OF  COTTON.  233 

without  fertilizers,  a  bale  to  the  acre,  at  a  cost  of  3  cents  a  pound ;  2 
per- cent,  three-fourths  of  a  bale,  costing-  3.1  cents;  15  per  cent,  half  a 
bale,  costing  1  cents;  30  per  cent  produces  one-third  of  a  bale,  costing 
5.8  cents. 

On  the  pine  levels  of  Mississippi  in  1880  cotton  seems  to  have  been 
produced  cheaper  than  anywhere  else  in  the  State,  the  lowest  estimate 
for  the  whole  State,  as  to  cost  of  production — 1  cents — being  given 
there.  In  1893  the  estimate  of  cost  of  production  is  1  cents  on  the 
best  land  and  G^-  cents  on  the  poorer  lands. 

THE   PINE-HILLS   REGION. 

This  region  stretches  inland  from  the  northern  border  of  the  pine 
levels  along  the  whole  extent  of  the  latter,  reaching  an  elevation  of  200 
to  400  feet  above  sea  level.  The  country  is  rolling,  and  the  open  pine 
woods  of  the  pine  levels  is  replaced  by  a  long-leaf  pine  woods,  with 
an  undergrowth  of  many  varieties  of  oak,  and  some  hickory.  This 
region  covers  over  39,000,000  acres,  58  per  cent  of  which  is  in  farms. 
Twenty-two  per  cent  of  the  whole  area  consists  of  improved  land,  and 
7  per  cent  of  it  was  planted  in  cotton  in  1890.  It  produced  in  1890  15 
per  cent  of  the  whole  cotton  crop,  the  acreage  having  been  increased 
31  per  cent,  and  the  crop  37  per  cent,  during  the  eleventh  decade. 

The  increase  in  acreage  was  general  except  in  the  long-leaf  pine 
hills  of  Texas,  where  a  slight  falling  off  was  shown.  It  was  greatest 
in  South  Carolina,  amounting  there  to  01  per  cent.  The  increase  in  the 
crop  was  not  so  uniform.  There  was  an  actual  decrease  in  Xorth  Caro- 
lina, notwithstanding  the  increased  acreage,  as  well  as  in  Texas.  In 
South  Carolina  the  increased  acreage  produced  a  larger  crop  by  only 
57  per  cent,  but  in  Georgia,  Alabama,  Mississippi,  and  Louisiana,  the 
crops  were  increased  very  considerably  more  than  the  acreage. 

This  region  contains  Burke,  the  county  of  largest  cotton  production 
in  Georgia;  Mecklenburg,  the  banner  cotton  county  of  Xorth  Caro- 
lina, and  Barbour,  second  in  production  among  the  counties  of  Alabama. 
The  credit,  however,  of  producing  more  cotton  in  1890  thau  any  other 
county  in  this  region  belongs  to  Barnwell,  in  South  Carolina,  which 
grew  50,170  bales,  placing  it  fourth  iu  the  list  of  cotton-producing 
counties  in  the  cotton  belt  for  that  year,  the  others  being  Abbeville, 
S.  C,  and  Washington  and  Bolivar  counties,  Miss. 

The  population  did  not  increase  so  rapidly  as  the  acreage  and  crop 
of  cotton,  being  only  16  per  cent  greater  in  1890  than  it  was  in  18S0. 
Although  the  white  population  preponderates  in  G3  per  cent  of  the 
counties  constituting  this  region,  being  more  numerous  than  the  colored 
race  in  Xorth  Carolina,  Alabama,  Mississippi,  Louisiana,  and  Texas, 
nevertheless  the  pine  hills  of  South  Carolina  and  Georgia  are  so 
thickly  settled  with  negroes  that  it  made  this  race  count  for  51  per 
cent  of  the  whole  population  of  the  region  in  1890.  The  colored  race 
was  53  per  cent  of  the  population  in  1880.     The  per  capita  production 


234 


THE    COTTON   PLANT. 


of  cotton  amounted  to  275  pounds  of  lint  at  the  beginning  and  337 
pounds  of  lint  at  the  close  of  the  eleventh  decade. 

The  work  animals  are  mostly  mules,  especially  in  Georgia  and  South 
Carolina,  where  there  are  large  colored  populations;  in  Mississippi, 
Louisiana,  and  Texas,  where  the  whites  preponderate,  there  are  more 
horses.  The  acreage  of  improved  land  per  work  animal  is  33  acres,  an 
increase  of  3  acres  during  the  eleventh  decade.  This  acreage  is  greatest 
in  North  and  South  Carolina  (40  and  37  acres,  respectively)  than  it  is 
in  Louisiana  (19  acres)  and  in  Texas  (6  acres).  Four  and  one-tenth 
bales  of  cotton  were  produced  to  the  work  animal  in  1890,  against  3.7 
bales  in  1880.  In  South  Carolina  0.1  bales  were  made,  in  Georgia  6.1, 
and  in  Alabama  4.8,  and  less  in  the  other  States,  until  Texas  oidy 
produced  0.9  of  a  bale.  But  everywhere  with  the  increase  of  arable 
land  to  the  work  animal  there  was  also  an  increase  in  the  cotton  pro- 
duced to  the  animal. 

The  average  size  of  the  farms  in  the  pine  hills  in  1 890  was  134  acres, 
being  a  decrease  of  27  acres  to  the  farm  since  the  census  of  1880.  Forty- 
three  per  cent  of  these  farms  were  under  50  acres,  an  increase  in  the 
number  of  farms  of  this  class  of  3  per  cent  during  the  decade.  During 
this  period  there  was  a  decline  in  the  number  of  farms  worked  by  owners 
of  5  per  cent,  only  53  per  cent  belonging  to  that  class.  There  was  no 
increase  iu  the  number  of  farms  rented  for  a  share  of  the  crop,  and  the 
larger  number  which  were  rented  were  rented  for  fixed  money  rents. 

Marlboro  County,  in  South  Carolina,  is  a  typical  cotton  county  of  this 
region.  It  produced  in  1890  32,306  bales  of  cotton  on  58,836  acres, 
being  a  little  over  a  bale  to  1.8  acres,  a  yield  not  exceeded  anywhere 
except  in  the  alluvium  of  the  Mississippi  Kiver. 

The  prevailing  tendency  of  agriculture  in  the  cotton  belt  may  be 
illustrated  by  the  changes  in  the  expenditure  of  agricultural  energy 
that  have  taken  place  in  Marlboro  in  the  last  fifty  years,  exhibited  by 
the  per  capita  production  of  the  leading  staples  of  the  farm,  as  follows: 

Production  of  crops  and  farm  stock  per  capita  in  Marlboro  County,  S.  C. 


Tear. 

Cotton 
(lint). 

Cereals. 

Horses 
and 

mules. 

Keat 
cattle. 

Swine.    Sheep. 

1840  

Poxinds. 

71 

437 

647 

Bushels. 
36 
29 
21 

0.20 
.20 
.16 

1.10 
.66 
.11 

1.90 

1.68 

.39 

0.34 

I860  

.28 

1890  

.01 

The  change  has  been  continuous  and  progressive  from  a  more  or  less 
mixed  husbandry  to  one  which  has  made  everything  subsidiary  to 
the  production  of  cotton.  The  lauds  of  Marlboro  were  thought  to  be 
exhausted  in  the  early  part  of  this  century,  and  numbers  of  the  popu- 
lation emigrated  to  the  fresh  lands  of  Alabama.  The  lands  they  left 
were  level  and  wet.  An  extensive  system  of  drainage  was  instituted, 
and  in  the  course  of  forty  years  it  is  thought  that  the  general  water 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON.  235 

level  has  been  lowered  5  feet.  This  was  the  foundation  on  which  they 
built. 

From  one-third  in  some  parts  to  two-thirds  in  others  of  the  field 
work  was  done  by  whites  in  1880,  notwithstanding'  that  the  colored 
population  Las  largely  increased  since  the  improvement  iu  the  cotton 
crop,  their  services  being  iu  requisition  for  picking  that  crop.  The  size 
of  the  farms  is  larger  than  in  the  other  counties  of  this  region  in  South 
Carolina,  and  the  occupancy  by  owners  is  greater.  Very  little  of  the 
land  lies  fallow.  Cropping  is  continuous.  Fields  planted  in  cotton  for 
fourteen  successive  years  produce  better  than  they  did  at  first.  Eota- 
tion  of  crops  when  practiced  is  similar  to  what  it  is  elsewhere — cotton 
one  year,  corn  the  next,  followed  by  oats  in  the  fall,  the  oats  followed 
the  ensuing  summer  by  corn  and  peas,  or  by  peas  alone.  The  fourth 
year  the  stubble  is  broken  up,  8  to  10  inches  deep,  and  cotton  planted 
again.  The  culture  of  very  little  land  has  been  abandoned  of  late. 
Within  the  eleventh  decade  the  improved  land  has  been  increased  27 
per  cent,  and  the  estimated  value  of  farms  74  per  cent. 

Green  manuring  with  the  cowpea  sown  broadcast  has  been  exten- 
sively practiced,  and  when  cotton  is  laid  by,  peas  are  often  drilled 
between  the  rows,  where  the  beds  for  the  next  year's  cotton  crop  is  to 
be  thrown  up.  All  of  the  cotton  seed,  or  its  equivalent  in  meal,  is 
returned  to  the  soil,  either  alone  or  composted  with  stable  manure, 
woods  mold,  and  superphosphate  of  lime.  In  1880  an  average  of  $4.77 
per  acre  for  each  acre  in  cotton  was  expended  in  commercial  fertilizers. 
After  clearing  the  old  stalks,  or  breaking  the  stubble  land,  a  furrow 
with  a  shovel  plow  was  run  in  the  old  alley,  or  the  land  broken  broad- 
cast was  laid  off  in  4-foot  rows  with  the  same  implement.  The  cotton- 
seed compost  and  stable  manure  were  placed  in  this  furrow  and  the 
bed  built  upon  it  with  single-horse  turn  plows.  This  should  be  done 
early  in  February  to  prevent  the  cotton  seed  from  sprouting  and  coming 
up.  Another  point  is  to  get  the  manure  covered  as  deeply  as  practica- 
ble, so  as  to  keep  it  moist.  Even  after  the  greatest  care,  the  farmer  is 
often  disappointed  to  find  his  manure  brought  to  the  surface  during 
cultivation,  where,  exposed  to  the  dry  heat  of  summer,  it  is  of  no  avail. 
It  appears  that  the  particles  of  the  soil  are  not  at  rest,  but  under 
various  influences,  especially  rains,  they  cave  in  and  settle.  The  law 
of  specific  gravity  operates,  and  in  time  the  diverse  components  are 
assorted  and  find  their  respective  levels  as  surely  as  cork  floats  or  lead 
sinks  in  water. 

Planting  takes  place  in  April,  usually  with  a  seed  sower.  Early 
planting  is  best,  except  for  the  risk  of  damage  by  frost,  for  late  plant- 
ing may  lack  moisture  to  come  up  to  a  stand.  The  after  culture  is  with 
the  hoe,  to  keep  the  cotton  clean  in  the  drill.  This  is  most  easily  done 
in  fields  planted  continuously  in  cotton,  because  the  long  summer  cul- 
tivation, especially  if  done  thoroughly  late  in  the  season,  is  very  effect- 
ive in  destroying  the  seeds  of  every  variety  of  grass  and  weeds.     Each 


236  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

hoeing  is  followed  by  the  plow,  whicli  throws  the  dirt  close  np  to  the 
stalk.  The  cultivation  of  cotton  throughout  the  pine  hills  does  not 
vary  much  from  this.  In  some  places  the  labor  of  knocking  down  the 
cotton  stalks  with  a  club  or  pulling  them  is  avoided  by  using  a  stalk 
cutter.  The  usual  form  is  a  gum  log  18  inches  in  diameter  and  G  feet 
long  set  to  roll  in  a  frame,  to  which  a  tongue  for  two  horses  is  fitted. 
Bars  of  iron  3  inches  by  4-  inch,  sharpened  on  one  edge,  are  fastened 
edgewise  by  staples  to  the  log.  A  man  and  two  horses  will  cut  up  the 
stalks  on  10  to  12  acres  a  day  with  this  implement,  taking  two  rows  at 
a  time. 

Before  the  profuse  use  of  commercial  fertilizers  was  depended  on  so 
largely,  the  cotton  growers  considered  it  of  extreme  importance  to  have 
the  plants  exactly  spaced,  so  that  each  might;  obtain  its  share  of  what 
the  unaided  soil  had  to  offer.  This  was  effected  in  various  ways.  A 
man  was  furnished  with  a  dibble  to  make  holes,  in  which  he  dropped  the 
seed,  covering  them  with  his  foot.  A  pointer  extending  from  the  dibble 
marked  the  spot  where  each  successive  hole  was  to  be  made.  Another 
arrangement  was  to  drag  the  beds  off,  two  at  a  time,  with  a  drag  pulled 
by  a  horse  walking  in  the  alley.  This  left  a  fresh  surface  free  of  grass. 
The  drag  was  followed  by  a  horse  pulling  two  wheels,  on  which  cogs, 
spaced  at  the  desired  distances,  made  the  holes  for  the  seed  in  the  two 
rows  that  had  been  dragged  off.  The  dibble  was  followed  by  four 
women  or  children,  who  dropped  the  seed  in  the  holes,  and  the  operation 
was  completed  by  covering  a  single  row  with  a  scraper  pushed  by  hand, 
or  two  by  a  board  drawn  by  a  horse.  Nearly  perfect  stands  were 
obtained  and  kept  by  this  precision,  for  there  could  never  be  any  doubt 
when  a  hill  was  missing  or  was  cut  up  by  the  hoe  hand,  and  careful 
replanting  was  required.  There  were  210  hills  to  the  acre  row,  60  rows 
to  the  acre ;  and  if  the  stalks  bore  6  bolls  on  the  average,  half  a  bale 
was  made  to  the  acre,  a  fair  and  pretty  certain  average  for  land  with- 
out commercial  fertilizers,  depending  for  restoration  on  rest  each  alter- 
nate year  and  such  stable  manure  as  could  be  obtained.  Now  6  bolls 
to  the  stalk  would  be  a  failure,  for  the  spacing  of  the  hills  being  left 
entirely  to  the  judgment  of  the  hoe  hand,  they  stand  anywhere  from  1 
to  3  feet  apart,  the  deficiency  in  their  number  being  corrected  by  the 
application  of  commercial  fertilizers  until  it  has  become  an  axiom  that 
cotton  will  produce  equally  well  when  planted  3  by  3  feet,  or  4  by  4  feet, 
or  4  by  1  foot. 

Shallow  culture  has  always  been  aimed  at  in  the  light,  loamy  soil  of 
the  pine  hills. 

Notwithstanding  more  or  less  depressing  reports,  owing  to  the  increase 
of  the  population  and  to  the  increments  in  repairs  and  improvements 
which  convert  the  daily  labor  of  the  farmer  into  the  fixed  capital  of  the 
country,  farm  values  have  risen  in  the  pine  hills  region  during  the 
eleventh  decade  42  per  cent.  The  largest  increase  (152  per  cent)  took 
place  in  Louisiana  and  the  least  (24  per  cent)  in  North  Carolina.     The 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON.  237 

other  States  stood  in  the  following  order:  Alabama,  70  per  cent;  South 
Carolina,  01 ;  Mississippi,  59;  Texas,  30,  and  Georgia,  29  per  cent.  The 
increase  in  the  value  of  agricultural  products  for  the  whole  region  was 
22  per  cent,  ranging  from  an  increase  of  98  per  cent  in  Louisiana  to  a 
decrease  of  17  per  cent  in  the  pine  hills  of  North  Carolina.  The  other 
States  stood  in  the  following  order:  Alabama,  Mississippi,  Georgia, 
South  Carolina,  Texas.  The  average  value  per  acre  of  farm  lauds  was 
$0.18  in  1890,  an  increase  from  $4.54  in  1880.  These  values  were  greater 
in  the  eastern  and  older  States,  and  less  in  the  western  and  younger 
ones,  ranging  from  $9.30  in  South  Carolina  to  $3.45  in  Texas.  The 
values  for  the  other  States  stood :  North  Carolina,  $7.41;  Georgia,  $5.93; 
Alabama,  $1.31;  Mississippi,  $4.74;  Louisiana,  $3.92. 

The  estimates  of  the  cost  of  production  were  as  follows:  North  Car- 
olina in  1880,  three  estimates,  varying  from  5£  to  10  cents,  average 
7  cents;  in  1892,  labor,  provisions,  and  rent  being  cheap,  the  estimate 
was  3|  cents  on  the  best  land,  and  0.6  cents  on  land  making  200  pounds 
of  lint  to  the  acre,  which  itself  was  a  good  deal  above  the  average 
product  of  the  region.  South  Carolina,  eleven  estimates,  in  1880,  rang- 
ing from  6  to  lOf  cents,  placed  the  average  cost  at  8  cents  per  pound;  in 
1892,  five  estimates,  running  from  5£  to  7f  cents,  gives  an  average  of 
6.03  cents  per  pound.  Georgia  estimates  for  1880  place  the  cost  at  3  to 
6  cents,  under  good  management,  with  all  necessary  supplies.  Alabama, 
1880,  estimates  8  cents ;  1892,  cost  4|  cents  (exclusive  of  rent)  and  7f 
cents.  Mississippi,  1892,  cost  0^  cents.  These  estimates,  with  one 
exception  in  Alabama,  include  charges  for  interest  on  plant,  rent,  and 
management,  and  would  therefore  indicate  a  fair  profit. 

METAMORPHIC   OR  PIEDMONT  REGION. 

The  northern  border  of  the  pine-hills  region  touches  a  region  extend- 
ing through  North  Carolina,  South  Carolina,  Georgia,  and  Alabama, 
underlain  by  granite  and  kindred  rocks,  known  as  the  metamorphic  or 
Piedmont  region.  The  southern  limits  of  this  region  are  marked  by  the 
falls  of  the  rivers  which,  rising  in  the  lofty  Appalachian  range  that  walls 
in  its  northern  borders,  pass  through  it  on  a  steep  incline  and  leave,  it 
here  for  a  quieter  channel  through  the  sands  and  alluvium  of  the  lower 
country.  The  whole  of  this  region  is  not  planted  in  cotton.  Two 
mountainous  counties  of  northern  Georgia  produce  none;  in  six  coun- 
ties in  western  North  Carolina  2,000  acres  only  were  planted  in  it,  while 
ten  other  counties  there  produce  no  cotton  at  all.  The  area  of  this 
region  included  in  the  cotton  belt  proper  contains  32,000,000  acres, 
and  produced  in  1890  16.8  j)er  cent  of  the  entire  crop.  Only  10  per 
cent  of  this  area  was  planted  in  cotton,  being  an  increase  of  2  per  cent 
since  1880.  Thirty-five  per  cent  of  the  region  is  improved  land  and  80 
per  cent  is  in  farms,  being  in  both  these  regards  a  larger  percentage 
than  elsewhere  in  the  cotton  belt.  Of  the  improved  lands  30  per  cent 
was  in  cotton  in  1890,  being  3  per  cent  more  than  in  1880.    The  acreage 


238  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

in  cotton  rose  during  the  eleventh  decade  from  something  over  2,500,000 
acres  to  nearly  3,500,000.  The  percentage  of  increase  was  greatest  in 
South  Carolina  (35  per  cent)  and  least  in  Alabama  (20  per  cent).  The 
400,000  additional  acres  in  Georgia  were  only  21)  per  cent  increase  on 
what  was  in  cotton  there  in  1880.  The  increase  in  North  Carolina  was 
31  per  cent,  but  it  was  accompanied  by  a  decrease  of  7  per  cent  of  the 
crop.  During  the  same  period  the  crop  of  this  region  was  increased  32 
per  cent.  The  increase  of  the  crop,  except  in  North  Carolina,  was  gen- 
eral. Georgia  showed  an  increase  of  12  per  cent,  Alabama  of  40,  and 
South  Carolina  of  35.  The  number  of  acres  required  to  make  a  bale 
remained  very  much  the  same.  The  average  was  2.8  acres,  Georgia 
alone  showing  greater  production,  making  a  bale  to  2.7  acres,  while  it 
required  3  acres  to  do  this  in  1880.  The  per  capita  production  of  cotton 
also  showed  an  increase,  being  269  pounds  of  lint  for  each  head  of  the 
X»opulation  in  1890  against  228  pounds  in  1880. 

The  white  population  preponderates,  only  42  per  cent  belonging  to 
the  colored  race,  a  decrease  of  1  per  cent  during  the  eleventh  decade. 
The  decrease  was  marked  in  South  Carolina,  Georgia,  and  Alabama, 
and  was  accompanied  in  each  of  these  States  by  an  increase  in  the  per 
capita  production  of  cotton.  There  was  an  increase  of  the  colored 
population  in  North  Carolina,  and  there  a  marked  decrease  in  the  per 
capita  production  of  cotton  is  to  be  observed. 

In  1890  the  220,000  farms  of  the  Piedmont  region  averaged  114  acres 
to  the  farm,  a  decrease  in  size  from  131  acres  in  1880.  Only  half  of 
these  farms  were  occupied  by  owners  at  the  later  date,  while  more  than 
half  (55  per  cent)  were  so  occupied  in  1880.  The  percentage  of  small 
farms  under  50  acres  had  also  increased  from  30  per  cent  to  40  per  cent 
of  the  whole  number.  The  larger  porportion  of  renters  paid  a  share  of 
the  crop,  38  per  cent  of  the  farms  being  rented  on  this  condition  and 
12  per  cent  for  a  fixed  money  rent.  In  South  Carolina  and  Georgia, 
where  the  colored  populations  were  the  largest,  the  greater  percentages 
of  rented  farms  and  small  farms  were  found,  and  the  decrease  in  the 
average  acreage  of  farms  was  greatest.  The  reverse  of  this  was  true 
of  North  Carolina  and  Alabama,  where  the  proportion  of  the  colored 
population  was  less.  In  the  same  connection  it  may  be  noted  that 
mules  far  outnumbered  the  horses  in  South  Carolina  and  Georgia  and 
the  horses  outnumbered  the  mules  in  North  Carolina  and  Alabama. 
The  average  of  improved  land  to  the  work  animal  increased  during 
the  eleventh  decade  from  29  to  34  acres,  and  was  general  throughout 
this  region.  Three  and  seven-tenths  bales  of  cotton  were  produced 
to  the  work  animal  in  1890,  an  increase  of  0.7  of  a  bale  over  1880.  In 
South  Carolina  5.5  bales  to  the  work  animal  were  made;  in  Georgia, 
5.2;  in  Alabama,  4.3. 

Cotton  culture  in  the  South  has  not  yet  reached  that  stage  of  devel- 
opment where  everyone  has  settled  down  on  the  best  plan.  Diversity 
of  methods  and  of  implements  will   be   noticed  on  adjacent  farms. 


CULTURE* OF    COTTON.  239 

Nevertheless,  there  is  almost  always  some  model  system  which  is  fol- 
lowed more  or  less  closely  and  with  greater  or  less  success.  In  the  Pied- 
mont region  Mr.  David  Dickson,  of  Sparta.  Ga.,  a  very  successful  cotton 
grower  and  forcible  writer  on  agriculture,  set  an  example  which  has 
been  very  widely  followed.  He  advocated  deep  breaking  and  subsoiling, 
saying  that  to  stand  a  two  weeks'  drought  a  cotton  plant  must  have 
4  inches  depth  of  soil  and  G  inches  depth  of  subsoil  well  broken,  and 
for  every  additional  week  an  inch  more  of  soil,  with  the  same  subsoil- 
ing. lie  did  not  recommend  fall  breaking,  for  the  winters  being  usually 
mild  and  wet,  plowed  land  was  exposed  to  injury  from  washing  and 
leaching,  and  was  apt  to  run  together  closer  than  if  it  had  not  been 
broken.  In  cold,  dry  winters  the  reverse  is  true,  but  these  are  of  rare 
occurrence  in  this  latitude.  The  land  should  be  broken  as  near  the  time 
for  planting  as  practicable.  Commence  at  the  foot  of  the  hill  and  cir- 
cle round  on  a  level,  finishing  at  the  top.  Eotation  of  crops  was  rest, 
cotton,  corn,  small  grain,  and  rest  again.  Rows  are  laid  off  4  feet  apart 
with  a  shovel  plow,  running  twice  in  .the  furrow  and  leaving  it  8  inches 
deep.  Into  this  furrow  drill  the  fertilizer  and  manure,  running  a  scooter 
plow  5  inches  wide  on  each  side  to  cover  it.  Build  up  the  bed  by  run- 
ning a  turning  plow,  going  7  inches  deep  on  each  side  of  the  scooter 
furrows  and  throwing  the  dirt  over  them.  The  bed  is  completed  with 
a  large  2-horse  shovel  running  in  the  middle  and  bursting  it  out.  Seed 
is  drilled  in  with  a  planter.  As  soon  as  the  plants  are  well  up  they  are 
sided  with  a  22-inch  sweep,  running  flat  so  as  not  to  throw  dirt,  and 
then  hoed,  not  chopped  but  scraped,  the  hoe  never  being  raised  more 
than  18  inches  from  the  ground.  The  plants  are  left  two  or  three 
together  the  width  of  the  hoe  apart,  it  being  desirable  to  have  eight 
stalks  to  the  yard.  Cotton  thick  m  the  row  with  good  distance  between 
the  rows  fruits  earlier  and  better.  The  wing  of  the  sweep  should  be 
turned  up  for  the  next  plowing  and  a  little  dirt  thrown  to  the  cotton. 
The  sweeps  should  be  kept  constantly  sharpened,  and  should  never  run 
deeper  than  one-half  to  1  inch.  Two  hoeings  and  ten  furrows  with  the 
sweep,  eight  to  side  the  cotton  and  two  to  split  out  the  middle  of  the 
row,  complete  the  working.  This  makes  1J  days'  work  of  a  mule  to 
the  acre,  going  10.G  miles  a  day.  In  picking,  hands  were  trained  to  pull 
out  all  the  cotton  from  the  boll  at  one  movement  of  the  hand.  Pickers 
trained  in  this  way  gathered  two  to  three  bales  a  week  for  Mr.  Dickson. 
He  commenced  using  fertilizer  in  1846,  and  was  the  first  farmer  in 
Georgia  to  do  so,  and  his  success  induced  many  others  to  make  enor- 
mous expenditures  on  this  account.  He  did  not  think  homemade 
manure  any  cheaper  than  commercial  fertilizers,  although  he  recom- 
mended its  saving  and  use.  It  must  be  said  that  very  few  farmers  get 
through  their  crops  with  two  hoeings ;  four  are  more  frequently  required. 
Crab  grass,  which  pervades  the  whole  cotton  belt,  is  easily  killed  when 
young,  but  when  it  forms  a  stool  and  tillers  not  ouly  is  its  growth  rapid 
but  its  vitality  is  greatly  augmented.    "  Crab  "  is  a  corruption  of  "  crap," 


240  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

which  is  in  turn  the  corrupted  pronunciation  of  "crop"  in  some  rural 
dialects.     De  Brahm,  writing  in  1752,  says  of  it: 

New  land  produces  scarcely  auy  grass,  and  one  hoeing  will  do  for  the  soason,  but 
the  grass  conies  and  increases  in  such  a  manner  that  sometimes  three  hoeings  are 
scarcely  sufficient  iu  one  season,  and  when  this  conies  to  be  the  case  the  planters 
relinquish  these  iields  for  pastures  and  clear  new  ground  of  its  wood. 

It  is  on  account  of  this  grass,  also,  that  most  farmers  prefer  to  hoe 
before  plowing,  to  make  sure  of  cleaning  the  drill  of  this  fine  grass, 
which  is  likely  to  escape  notice  if  the  dirt  has  been  moved  by  the 
plow,  so  that  until  a  shower  has  settled  the  dirt  after  plowing  the  drill 
can  not  be  thoroughly  cleaned  by  the  hoe.  The  hoe  also  necessarily 
removes  some  dirt  from  the  plant  and  should  be  followed  by  the  plow 
to  return  it.  Few  farmers  are  able  to  plow  only  one-half  inch,  or  even 
1  inch  deep,  as  Mr.  Dickson  did,  although  it  would  be  very  desirable  to 
do  so.  If  carefully  measured,  the  depth  of  the  cultivating  furrow  will 
be  found  to  exceed  2  inches  more  frequently  than  it  falls  below  it. 

The  counties  leading  in  cotton  production  are  Mecklenburg,  IS.  C; 
Abbeville,  S.  C.  (which  stood  third  among  the  counties  of  the  cotton 
belt  in  the  annual  production  in  1890);  Coweta,  Ga.,  and  Chambers, 
Ala.  The  value  per  acre  of  lands  in  farms  increased  during  the 
eleventh  decade  from  $0.07  per  acre  to  $8.12.  It  stood  as  follows  in 
the  different  States:  North  Carolina,  $6.75  to  $8.70;  South  Carolina, 
$5.91  to  $8.75;  Georgia,  $6.01  to  $8.38;  Alabama,  $4.17  to  $5.43. 

The  cost  of  producing  a  pound  of  cotton  lint  in  the  Piedmont  region 
is  stated  as  follows:  North  Carolina,  1880,  four  estimates,  varying  from 
4.6  to  10  cents,  average  6.2  cents;  1892,  six  estimates,  varying  from 
5  to  8  cents,  average  6.3  cents;  South  Carolina,  eight  estimates  in  1880, 
varying  from  5.71  to  8.25  cents,  average  6.91  cents;  1893,  eight  esti- 
mates, from  5  to  8  cetns,  average  5.7  cents;  Georgia,  1893,  six  esti- 
mates, varying  from  5^  to  8J  cents,  average  6.76  cents;  Alabama,  1893, 
one  estimate,  8  cents,  which  is  the  same  as  the  cost  given  by  Professor 
Smith  for  the  whole  State  in  1880. 

SAND-HILLS  REGION. 

The  Piedmont  region  only  touches  the  pine  hills  at  certain  points. 
Between  them  lies  a  belt  of  sand  hills  500  to  800  feet  in  height,  being 
often  higher  than  the  Piedmont  counties  immediately  north  of  them. 
The  sand-hills  region  extends  through  North  Carolina,  South  Carolina, 
and  Georgia.  On  reaching  Alabama  it  passes  between  the  Piedmont 
region  and  the  black  prairies,  and,  circling  northwestward  around  the 
Coal  Measures,  spreads  out  in  Tennessee  and  Kentucky.  The  total  area 
is  6,000,000  acres,  dG  per  cent  of  which  is  in  farms  and  5  per  cent  in 
cotton.  It  produces  about  one-tenth  as  much  cotton  as  the  Piedmont 
region,  or  1.6  per  cent  of  the  total  crop.  During  the  eleventh  decade 
the  acreage  in  cotton  increased  30  per  cent  and  the  crop  28  per  cent. 
This  was  much  more  than  the  increase  in  the  population,  which  was 


CULTURE  OF  COTTON.  241 

only  17  per  cent.  Sixty-five  per  cent  of  the  population  is  white,  and 
here,  as  in  other  places  where  this  occurs,  if  is  found  that  horses  are 
more  used  than  mules;  that  a  larger  number  of  farms  are  occupied  by 
owners;  that  the  small  farms  are  fewer,  and  that  the  size  of  farms  (150 
acres)  is  larger.  Nevertheless,  in  most  of  these  respects  farming  in  the 
sand  hills  is  changing  in  accordance  with  the  general  changes  that  are 
taking  place  in  the  cotton  belt;  farms  are  decreasing  in  size,  small 
farms  under  50  acres  are  increasing,  owners  occupy  a  smaller  percent- 
age, and  a  greater  number  are  being  rented. 

The  culture  of  cotton  here  resembles  that  of  the  adjacent  regions, 
except  that  up  to  this  date  larger  food  and  forage  supplies  and  more 
stock  have  been  raised  here. 

THE   PRAIRIE   REGION. 

This  region  of  the  cotton  belt  includes  the  black  prairies  of  Alabama, 
Mississippi,  and  Texas,  the  coast  prairies  of  Louisiana  and  Texas,  the 
gray-silt  prairie  of  Arkansas,  and  the  red-loam  prairie  of  western 
Texas.  The  Texas  prairies  farther  west,  being  sparsely  settled,  produce 
little  cotton.  The  region  thus  indicated  covers  more  than  65,000,000 
acres,  of  which  only  44  per  cent  in  1880  and  55  per  cent  in  1890  was  in 
farms.  The  percentage  of  improved  land  rose  from  12  to  27  per  cent 
during  the  eleventh  decade  and  the  percentage  in  cotton  from  4  to  6 
per  cent.  In  1880  the  prairies  produced  16.3  per  cent  of  the  whole  cot- 
ton crop;  in  1890  they  produced  20.6  per  cent.  The  acreage  in  cotton 
had  increased  48  per  cent  and  the  product  68  per  cent,  while  the  popu- 
lation had  only  increased  23  per  cent,  the  per  capita  production  of  cot- 
ton rising  from  277  pounds  of  lint  to  381  pounds.  The  largest  percentage 
of  total  area  in  farms  was  in  the  older  States  of  Alabama  (72  per  cent) 
and  Mississippi  (74  per  cent),  and  the  smallest  in  the  coast  prairies  of 
Texas  west  of  the  Brazos  (24  per  cent).  The  percentage  of  increase 
in  the  farm  area  was  greatest  in  the  red-loam  prairies  of  western  Texas 
(160  per  cent),  and  there  was  a  slight  decrease  in  the  prairies  of  north- 
eastern Mississippi,  at  the  other  extreme  of  this  region.  These  red- 
loam  prairies  produced  only  10,000  bales  in  1880,  and  it  was  thought 
that  cotton  culture  had  at  last  reached  its  western  limit  here,  but  the 
returns  of  1890  showed  an  increase  to  74,000  bales,  and  the  limits  of 
cotton  culture  were  moved  still  farther  westward  over  a  wide  extent  of 
country,  which  produced,  however,  only  6,000  bales  in  1890.  The  most 
notable  increase  in  the  area  in  farms  took  place  in  the  central  black 
prairies  of  Texas  (35  per  cent),  for  it  was  accompanied  by  a  doubling 
of  the  area  in  cotton  and  an  increase  of  146  per  cent  in  the  cotton  pro- 
duced, the  249,000  bales  made  there  in  1880  being  increased  to  more 
than  600,000  bales  in  1890.  When  it  is  remembered  that  only  7  per 
cent  of  the  area  of  these  black  prairies  in  Texas  is  in  cotton,  against 
18  per  cent  in  the  black  prairies  of  the  older  eastern  State  of  Alabama, 
an  idea  may  be  formed  of  the  extent  to  which  the  production  of  cotton 
1993— No.  33 16 


242 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


might  be  developed.  There  is  good  reason  to  believe  that  the  21,000,000 
acres  of  the  central  black  prairie  of  Texas  could,  if  need  be,  produce 
the  entire  crop  now  grown  in  the  South. 

Dallas  County,  Ala.,  stands  first  among  the  cotton-producing  counties 
in  the  prairies  of  that  State,  with  a  crop  of  42,000  bales  in  1890;  but 
this  was  far  below  the  crop  produced  as  far  back  as  1800,  which  was 
over  63,000  bales.  So,  too,  Hinds  County,  Miss.,  led  the  prairie  coun- 
ties there,  with  a  crop  of  42,000  bales  m  1800,  which  again  fell  short  of 
the  crop  of  54,000  bales  which  it  produced  in  18G0.  Ellis  County,  Tex., 
which  made  only  2,000  bales  in  18G0,  led  the  black  prairie  counties  of 
that  State  in  1890  with  a  crop  of  42,000  bales;  in  1892  it  made  a  crop 
of  50,000  bales,  and  in  1894  more  than  59,000  bales  were  shipped  from 
Waxahachie,  the  county  seat,  and  the  best  estimates  place  the  crop  of 
the  county  for  that  year  at  100,000  bales.  This  gives  it  the  distinction 
of  leading  all  the  other  counties  of  the  cotton  belt  in  the  amount  of  cot- 
ton produced. 

In  1880  40  per  cent  of  the  population  of  the  prairies  was  colored ;  in 
1890  the  percentage  had  fallen  to  39.  It  stood,  in  Alabama,  78  per  cent; 
in  Mississippi,  51  per  cent;  in  Louisiana,  44  per  cent;  in  Arkansas,  37 
per  cent;  in  Texas,  18  per  cent. 

The  following  table  shows  the  figures  given  in  the  Eleventh  United 
States  Census  in  regard  to  land  tenures  in  the  prairie  region,  and  also 
the  size  of  farms,  motive  power  in  agriculture,  value  of  farms  per  acre, 
and  the  acres  required  to  make  a  bale : 

Statistics  of  cotton  culture  in  the  prairie  region  of  the  cotton  belt. 


Locality. 


I. 

Black  prairie,  Texaa 

Gray-silt  prairie,  Arkansas... 

Red-loam  prairie,  Texas 

Coast  prairies,  Texas 

Coast  prairies,  Louisiana 

II. 

Black  prairie,  Alabama 

Black  prairie,  Mississippi 

Northeast  prairie,  Mississippi 


173 
118 
401 
220 
120 


98 
119 
102 


Or- 

03  s 


Number  of  counties  in 

which  white  or  colored 

and  horses  or  mules, 

outnumbered. 


$12.19 
11.83 
5.33 
9.82 
11.83 


6.40 
5.37 

7.79 


2.4 
2.3 
2.3 
2.4 
2.6 


3.0 
2.7 
4.4 


These  facts  point  in  one  direction,  and  the  general  conclusions  are 
that  where  the  owners  of  farms  largely  occupy  them  (1)  the  white 
population  generally  predominate ;  (2)  horse  power  is  used  in  preference 
to  mule  power;  (3)  farms  have  a  larger  acreage;  (4)  farms  under  50 
acres — that  is,  small  farms — are  fewer;  (5)  fewer  farms  are  rented; 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON.  243 

(6)  the  value  per  acre  of  land  is  greater;  (7)  the  production  of  cotton 
per  acre  is  greater.  Where  fewer  owners  occupy  their  farms,  the  facts 
are  the  reverse  of  these  several  statements. 

The  lower  value  of  land  in  the  red-loam  prairie  of  western  Texas 
apparently  forms  an  exception  to  these  conclusions.  When  it  is  pointed 
out  that  this  is  a  sparsely  peopled  country;,  newly  settled,  it  ceases  to 
be  an  exception.  The  farm  acreage,  too,  on  the  gray-silt  prairies  is  1 
acre  less  than  the  highest  acreage  in  the  second  series.  The  explana- 
tion of  this,  if  any  is  needed,  is  that  these  light  soils  have  been  less 
attractive  to  capital  than  the  rich  alluvium  to  be  found  in  nearly  every 
county  of  well-watered  Arkansas ;  that  they  tally  so  well  with  the  more 
fertile  sections  tends  to  confirm  the  general  conclusions.  In  making 
this  collocation  of  facts  it  is  not  meant  to  emphasize  any  one  as  the 
only  cause  of  all  the  others.  They  go  together,  and  it  may  be  safely 
said  that  the  difference  in  cotton  production  and  in  the  value  of  farms 
does  not  result  from  any  natural  conditions,  such  as  greater  or  less  fer- 
tility of  the  soil  or  a  more  or  less  favorable  climate.  The  facts  already 
given  as  to  the  cotton  production  of  the  leading  cotton  counties  of 
Alabama  and  Mississippi  in  1860,  when  agriculture  was  less  advanced, 
show  that  in  natural  fertility  they  were  not  inferior  to  the  black  prairies 
of  Texas,  now  the  most  productive  in  the  prairie  region.1  If  they  have 
become  so  since  it  must  result  from  the  methods  pursued  by  the  men 
who  cultivate  them,  either  from  choice  or  the  force  of  circumstances. 

The  changes  which  occurred  in  the  rural  economy  of  the  prairies 
during  the  eleventh  decade  were  similar  to  those  taking  place  through- 
out the  cotton  belt.  The  number  of  farms  occupied  by  their  owners 
decreased;  the  number  of  small  farms  increased  and  the  average  size 
of  farms  diminished;  the  amount  of  improved  land  to  the  work  animal 
increased,  and  the  percentage  of  the  colored  population  was  less.  The 
increase  in  the  acreage  of  cotton  was  accompanied  by  a  very  much 
greater  increase  in  the  crop,  which  was  a  marked  exception  to  the 
general  rule. 

The  number  and  variety  of  implements  recently  introduced  in  cotton 
culture  here,  especially  in  the  prairies  of  Texas,  is  very  much  greater 
than  elsewhere  in  the  cotton  belt.  The  planting  year  commences  there 
December  1 — a  month  or  more  earlier  than  in  the  East — and  a  good 
deal  of  work  is  done  before  January  1.  If  all  the  cotton  has  been 
picked,  the  first  operation  is  to  dispose  of  the  cotton  stalks.  This  is 
usually  done  with  a  stalk  chopper.  A  number  of  patented  implements 
are  used  for  this  purpose.  They  consist  of  five  to  seven  steel  knives 
over  2  feet  in  length,  bolted  to  iron  arms  which  revolve  in  a  frame 
swung  from  auother  frame  supported  on  two  wheels.  Two  horses  pull 
this  machine  along  the  cotton  row,  and  the  stalks  are  chopped  off  by 
the  revolving  knives  2  to  1  inches  above  the  ground  and  cut  into  pieces. 


'Tenth  Census  of  the  United  States,  1880,  Vols.  V  and  VI.     Cotton  Production, 
Parts  I  and  II.     (See  also  chapter  on  climatology  and  soils.; 


244  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

A  driver  rides,  and  adds  his  weight  to  the  blow  of  the  knives.  Some- 
times a  double  stalk  chopper  is  used,  which  takes  two  rows  at  a  time, 
and  is  pulled  by  three  horses,  thus  saving  one  hand  and  a  horse.  The 
work  is  very  thorough.  Cornstalks  are  removed  by  running  a  heavy 
roller  along  the  rows,  breaking  them  down,  when  they  are  raked  by  a 
very  large  wooden  rake,  pulled  by  horses,  at  right  angles  to  the  direc- 
tion in  which  the  roller  moved,  piling  them  in  windrows,  to  be  burned. 
With  both  these  implements  a  seat  is  arranged  for  the  driver,  and  he 
rides.  Breaking,  and,  in  fact,  almost  all  the  work  of  tillage  and  culti- 
vation, is  done  with  two  horses.  Several  varieties  of  steel  plows  with 
steel  beams  are  used.  A  large  disk  plow  is  being  introduced.  It  con- 
sists of  one  to  four  heavy  steel  disks  revolving  in  a  heavy  frame.  Four 
to  eight  horses  are  required  to  pull  it,  and  it  breaks  from  2  to  7 
acres  of  the  tough  prairie  land  to  the  depth  of  8  inches  in  a  day. 
Often,  however,  the  preparation  for  planting  cotton  consists  only  in 
throwing  two  2-horse  turning-plow  furrows  into  the  old  alley  and 
completing  the  preparation  by  running  a  large  2-horse  double-mold 
plow  in  the  last  year's  bed,  making  in  all  only  three  furrows  to  the 
row.  It  is  thought  best  to  do  this  work  early,  so  as  to  allow  time  for 
the  beds  to  settle,  which  are  sometimes  freshened  up  by  running  a  cut- 
away harrow  across  them  just  before  planting.  A  number  of  excellent 
cotton-seed  planters  are  used,  and  they  are  implements  of  much  greater 
precision  than  the  Dow-Law  planter  and  its  modifications,  used  in  the 
East,  and  their  cost  is  proportionally  greater.  The  object  aimed  at  is 
to  deposit  the  seed  regularly  in  a  single  line,  with  barely  a  space 
between  each,  which,  while  it  saves  seed,  obviates  their  coming  up  in 
bunches,  difficult  to  thin,  and  lifting  the  earth  and  thus  exposing  the 
teuder  stems  to  the  vicissitudes  of  the  spring  weather.  Practically  no 
fertilizers  are  used,  and  very  little  of  the  manure  from  the  many  thou- 
sands of  beeves  fattened  here  yearly  on  cotton-seed  meal  and  hulls  is 
utilized.  Some  farmers  say  that  manures  cause  the  crop  to  fire  in  dry 
seasons,  and  that  the  natural  fertility  of  the  soil  suffices,  lands  that 
have  been  planted  successively  for  forty  years  producing  better  than 
when  fresh.  There  is  no  doubt  that  these  stiff  soils  are  pulverized  and 
rendered  lighter  and  more  productive  by  some  years  of  tillage,  but  the 
old  farmers  admit  that  the  effect  of  continued  cropping  is  beginning  to 
show  in  a  somewhat  diminished  yield  in  places.  Biding  2-horse  cul- 
tivators have  been  used  for  many  years.  Before  their  use  cotton  rows 
were  made  4  feet  apart.  Since  their  introduction  it  has  been  found 
that  these  cultivators  clean  the  rows  best  when  they  are  spaced  40 
inches,  and  that  is  now  the  most  common  width.  Various  shares,  to 
suit  the  circumstances  of  the  case,  are  used  with  these  cultivators. 
The  first  workings,  which  are  deepest,  are  given  with  6-inch  sweeps, 
afterwards  12-inch  sweeps  are  used,  and  later  sometimes  even  larger 
ones.  The  culture  is  tolerably  flat.  The  double  shovel  is  sometimes 
used,  and  it  is  almost  the  only  1-horse  implement  used  on  most  of  the 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON.  245 

black  Texas  lands.  Some  farmers  say  they  would  not  know  how  to 
hitch  up  a  1-horse  team,  so  little  are  they  used.  It  is  calculated  that 
these  sulky  cultivators  should  plow  10  acres  a  day,  but  in  practice  they 
rarely  do  more  than  7.  Two  to  three  hand  hoeings  are  given,  and 
plowing,  under  the  best  culture,  is  done  six  to  seven  times  in  the  sea- 
son, more  to  stir  the  surface  than  to  kill  grass  and  weeds.  Grass  is 
not  so  troublesome  here  in  favorable  seasons  (moderately  dry)  as  else- 
where. Coco,  or  nut  grass,  is  not  much  feared,  but  there  is  great 
apprehension  regarding  Johnson  grass.  On  some  farms  where  it- 
appears  it  is  fenced  off  to  prevent  its  spreading  and  treated  with  heavy 
doses  of  arsenic,  which  kills  the  land  as  well  as  the  grass.  This  would 
seem  hardly  necessary,  as  this  grass  is  readily  subdued  in  the  East  by 
close  pasturing  with  stock,  and  the  prairies  of  Texas  themselves  fur- 
nish an  object  lesson  of  the  eradication  of  the  native  perennial  grasses 
by  continuous  grazing.  All  the  lands  in  Texas  are  fenced  in  with  wire, 
woodland  as  well  as  that  under  cultivation,  and  cattle  and  horses 
everywhere  feed  on  the  stubble  after  the  crops  have  been  gathered. 

Picking  cotton  is  a  heavy  item  of  expense,  the  usual  price  being  50 
cents  per  hundredweight  of  seed  cotton.  Cotton  pickers  here  are  more 
expert  than  elsewhere;  children  6  years  old  sometimes  pick  100  pounds, 
and  girls  of  9  years  have  picked  as  much  as  200  pounds.  First-class 
pickers  average  500  to  600  pounds  a  day,  and  as  much  as  800  pounds 
occasionally.  A  white  hand  was  timed  in  1894  and  picked  60  pounds 
in  an  hour,  or  a  pound  a  minute.  Such  results  require  a  very  abun- 
dant blow  of  cotton,  and  the  picking  is  not  very  neat,  a  good  deal  of 
trash,  such  as  the  hulls  of  bolls  and  stems,  being  mixed  with  the  cot- 
ton. A  variety  of  "  storm  proof"  cotton  so  called  because  it  is  not 
easily  blown  out  by  winds,  is  preferred.  Nevertheless,  in  1895,  it  was 
not  unusual  to  see  as  much  as  200  to  300  pounds  to  the  acre  of  the  crop 
of  the  previous  year  fallen  out  on  the  ground.  A  good  deal  of  the  crop, 
also,  was  left  unpicked,  not  only  where  the  crop  was  heavy,  but  almost 
in  the  same  proportion  on  the  poorer  lands.  The  explanation  given 
was  that  the  tenant  farmers  did  not  think  it  would  pay,  at  the  prevail- 
ing low  prices,  to  pick,  gin,  and  pack  what  was  in  the  field  for  their 
share — three-fourths  of  it — and  so  preferred  to  send  their  children  to 
school,  with  which  no  doubt  the  children  heartily  agreed,  for  picking 
cotton  in  cool  weather  is  not  attractive  work,  being  an  exercise  too  ligh 
to  keep  the  blood  warm.  Cotton  is  not  infrequently  left  in  piles  in  the 
field  after  being  picked,  a  practice  long  abandoned  elsewhere,  but  less 
ruinous  here  on  account  of  the  dryness  of  the  climate.  It  is  more  usual 
to  see  a  white,  canvas-covered  wagon  left  in  the  held,  its  pole  elevated,  to 
which  steelyards  are  suspended  for  weighing  the  cotton,  which  is  after- 
wards loaded  into  the  wagon  and  left  there  until  it  is  hauled  to  the  gin. 
It  is  not  feared  that  the  cotton  thus  exposed  will  be  stolen,  which  is 
quite  different  from  the  case  in  other  States,  where  it  has  been  found 
necessary  to  pass  stringent  laws  punishing  the  pilfering  of  seed  cottou. 


246  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

There  is  very  little  storage  for  cotton  in  Texas.  When  it  is  not  carried 
immediately  from  the  gin  to  the  compress  and  loaded  at  once  on  plat- 
form cars  for  transport,  the  bales  are  placed  on  edge  in  open  fields, 
protected  only  by  a  wire  fence,  and  exposed  to  rain,  wind,  and  dust. 

The  wastefulness  of  cotton  culture  is  great  in  Texas,  owing  to  the 
great  abundance  of  the  staple.  There  seems  to  be  a  waste  in  horse- 
power, such  small  areas  being  tilled  to  the  horse,  and  also  in  wages  paid  to 
labor,  which  have  ranged  from  $10  to  $18  a  month,  with  shelter,  fuel,  and 
rations;  fully  double  what  they  are  in  the  East.  It  was  common  to  give 
$10  a  month  for  ten  months  and  $18  a  month  for  the  two  months  during 
the  picking  season.  Owing  to  the  low  prices  a  reduction  is  being  made 
to  $10  for  ten  months  and  $20  for  the  months  at  picking.  The  fact  is, 
very  little  labor  is  hired  in  Texas.  By  far  the  larger  portion  of  the 
land  is  rented  out  for  money  rent  or  worked  on  shares,  the  latter  being 
done  to  a  much  greater  extent  than  is  exhibited  by  the  census  returns. 

The  estimates  of  the  cost  of  production  in  1880  were  as  follows:  Mis- 
sissippi, 1  estimate,  11  cents  per  pound  of  lint;  Arkansas,  10  estimates, 
varying  from  3  to  8J  cents,  average  6.2  cents;  Texas,  black  prairie,  14 
estimates,  34  to  9£  cents,  average  5.3  cents,  coast  prairies,  7  estimates, 
from  44  to  94  cents,  average  6£  cents,  red  loam  prairie,  2  estimates, 
each  44  cents.  Notice  is  again  directed  to  the  fact  that  where  a  country 
plants  only  a  limited  area  in  cotton,  although  that  country  is  appar- 
ently less  favorable  for  this  crop  than  other  more  fertile  localities, 
nevertheless  the  estimates  of  cost  from  the  limited  area  are  almost 
always  the  lowest — an  indication  that  were  this  culture  restricted 
everywhere  to  narrower  limits  cotton  might  be  grown  everywhere  at  a 
much  lower  cost. 

In  1891  circulars  were  sent  from  the  agricultural  experiment  station 
in  Texas  requesting  the  leading  farmers  in  various  parts  of  the  State 
to  keep  accounts  of  the  actual  cost  of  cotton  production  in  1892  and 
furnish  the  figures  to  the  station.  All  replies  not  supported  by  actual 
results  were  discarded.  The  replies  from  seven  careful,  practical 
cotton  growers  are  summarized  in  the  table  below,  Nos.  1  to  7.  The 
officers  of  the  station  undertook  themselves  to  obtain  the  same  infor- 
mation on  the  State's  farms,  and  these  results  are  summarized  in  Nos. 
8  to  12.  In  the  statements  marked  /  fertilizers  were  used;  in  the 
others  the  results  were  obtained  from  the  natural  fertility  of  the  soil. 
In  only  one  instance  (No.  2)  was  any  charge  for  management  entered. 
No.  6  is  reported  by  Jeff  Wellborn,  who  gathered  the  crop  of  l,r>00  pounds 
of  seed  cotton  from  the  acre  with  a  cotton  picker  at  a  cost  of  10  cents 
per  hundredweight.  Figures  marked  with  an  asterisk  (*)  indicate  loss. 
Where  the  price  of  the  seed  is  not  credited  it  is  because  they  were 
exchanged  to  pay  for  the  ginning  and  packing.  The  price  of  seed  in 
1892  was  $0.50  per  ton  and  in  1894  it  was  $6,  but  this  difference  is  not 
charged  in  the  tables.    The  first  section  of  the  table  shows  the  actual 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON. 


247 


cost  of  the  crop,  value  of  product,  and  profit  for  1892.  The  second  sec- 
tion gives  the  data  of  1892  estimated  at  the  average  price  (4£  cents)  the 
crop  would  have  brought  in  1894. 

Cost  of  cotton  production. 


.Number. 


1/ 

2 

3 

4 

5 

e 

7 

8/ 

9/ 

10/ 

U/ 

12 

Average 


1892. 


Cost  of         T,int  Price 

cultivat-  !    ,„u Value  per     1 

,  cotton        ,.       j  '       ■• 

mslacre  ,    ot  seed,  pound 

in  rnttv.n    PrOUUteU.  f  „    * 


in  cotton. 


$30.  55 
22.32 
13.68 
14.71 
21.31 
13. 85 
14.15 
34.90 
29.  36 
27.17 
31.  23 
18.84 


22.  02 


Pounds. 
650 
418  | 
250  i 
250  ; 
426  ; 
500 
250  I 
544  i 
484 
423 
502 
283 


$4.00 
3.00 


Profit 
per 
acre. 


3.25 


3.50 
3.12 
2.71 
3.22 
1.82 


Cents. 


$31.  95 
16.18 
.  7.57 

4.39 
10.64 
24.40 

7.10 
20.96 
20.34 
16.25 
20.00 

9.21 


1804. 


415 


15.77 


$31. 63 
20.77 
10.62 
12.22 
18.00 
24.50 
10.62 
26.62 
23.69 
20.69 
24.  56 
13.85 


Profit 
and 

loss. 


$1.  08 
*1.  55 
*3.  06 
*2.49 
*3.  30 
10.65 
*3.53 
*8.28 
*5.67 
*6.48 
*6.  67 
*4.99 


*2.  85 


Rent. 


$4.00 
3.00 
3.50 
3.96 
7.98 
4.00 
3.50 
3.00 
3.00 
3.00 
3.00 
3.00 


Proceeds 
per  acre, 

rent 
deducted. 


$5.08 

1.45 

.44 

1.47 

4.68 

14.65 

*.03 

*5.23 

*2.67 

*3.48 

*3.67 

*1.99 


3.73 


Excluding  No.  6  on  account  of  the  very  exceptional  method  by  which 
the  cost  of  picking  was  reduced,  the  average  cost  of  production  varies 
from  1.6  to  6.1  cents. 

These  were  good  crops,  making  the  unusual  average  of  115  pounds 
of  lint  per  acre.  At  the  prices  of  1892  they  showed  an  average  profit 
of  $15.77  per  acre.  The  same  crops  made  at  the  same  cost  would  have 
shown  an  average  loss  per  acre  at  the  prices  (4J  cents)  of  1891  of  $2.85. 
The  rents  were  13.73  per  acre  in  1892,  and  if  they  are  omitted  from  the 
charges  against  the  crop  in  1891  the  cotton  growers  would  have  had  a 
surplus  above  actual  expenses  of  88  cents  an  acre.  No  charge  for  man- 
agement was  made  in  any  statement  except  No.  7.  The  profit  in  1892 
was  large — larger  perhaps,  thau  any  profit  from  any  staple  cultivated 
on  so  extensive  a  scale.  Adding  in  the  rent,  there  is  a  clear  surplus  of 
$19.50  an  acre.  Counting  the  land,  buildings,  fences,  stock,  implements, 
and  working  capital  at  8195  per  acre,  it  was  paying  10  per  cent  (the  legal 
rate  of  interest  in  Texas)  upon  them.  Taking  the  average  of  the  black 
prairies  of  Texas,  the  investment  could  not  have  exceeded  $31;  double 
that,  on  the  assumption  that  these  were  choice  lands,  and  still  the  profit 
was  over  30  per  cent. 

The  commissioner  of  agriculture  of  Texas  in  his  report  for  1892 
states  that  with  a  population  of  2,500,000  and  250,811  farms  there  were 
only  57,012  farm  laborers  working  for  wages,  which  explains  the  high 
wages  paid  for  farm  labor,  the  average  being  813.S9  per  mouth.  If 
each  of  these  farms  averaged  three  cotton  pickers  and  they  should  only 
pick  100  pounds  each  a  day,  it  would  amount  to  50,000  bales  daily,  or  in 
the  100  days  of  a  short  picking  season  5,000,000  bales  could  be  gath- 
ered if  the  labor  were  effectively  distributed. 


248  THE  COTTON  PLANT. 

OAK  AND  HICKORY  REGION. 

This  region  lies  on  the  eastern  border  of  the  black  prairies  of  Texas. 
It  extends  over  eastern  Texas  and  northwestern  Louisiana,  and  south- 
eastern Arkansas  to  the  Mississippi  swamps.  Its  counterpart  in  the 
east  reaches  westward  from  the  northern  portion  of  the  black  prairies 
of  Alabama  and  Mississippi  to  the  table-lands  and  bluff  region  that 
rise  from  the  swamps  of  the  Mississippi  River.  Four  counties  in  west- 
ern Alabama  and  three  in  northeastern  Mississippi,  just  east  of  the 
black  prairies,  are  included  in  this  region.  It  covers  nearly  43,000,000 
acres,  about  half  of  it  lying  in  eastern  Texas,  and  in  1890  it  produced 
14.4  per  cent  of  the  entire  crop,  and  in  1880  it  produced  a  fraction  of  a 
per  cent  less.  In  1890  52  per  cent  of  this  area  was  included  in  farms 
(over  129,000  in  number),  and  21  per  cent  either  had  been  or  was  under 
cultivation,  nearly  4,000,000  acres  of  fresh  land  being  brought  in  during 
the  eleventh  decade.  This  increase  was  naturally  greater  in  the  newer 
Western  States  than  in  the  older  Eastern  ones,  rising  from  31  per  cent 
in  Alabama  to  129  per  cent  in  Louisiana.  This  region  reported  in  1880. 
a  large  amount  of  land  turned  out  of  cultivation,  which  is  included  as 
improved  land  in  the  returns  of  1890.  Such  abandoned  fields  were 
reported  as  20  to  90  per  cent  of  the  lands  once  under  cultivation  in 
Mississippi,  as  15  to  30  in  Arkansas,  as  10  to  50  in  Louisiana,  and  as  1  to 
50  in  Texas.  The  growth  of  oak,  hickory,  and  short-leaf  pine  furnish- 
ing material  for  an  extensive  lumber  business,  is  evidence  of  the  orig- 
inal good  quality  of  these  soils,  which  immigration  has  passed  over  in 
its  movement  westward.  The  area  planted  in  cotton  was  7  per  cent  of 
the  entire  area  and  32  per  cent  of  the  improved  land,  and  increased 
45  per  cent  during  the  eleventh  decade,  while  the  cottou  crop  only 
increased  30  per  cent.  The  percentage  of  increase  of  acreage  in  cotton 
and  the  percentage  of  increase  of  the  crop  stood  as  follows  in  the  different 
States :  Alabama,  increase  of  acreage  29  per  cent,  increase  of  crop  27  per 
cent;  Mississippi,  increase  of  acreage  14  per  cent,  increase  of  crop  12  per 
cent;  Louisiana,  increase  of  acreage  50  per  cent,  increase  of  crop  32 
per  cent;  Texas,  increase  of  acreage  52  per  cent,  increase  of  crop  44  per 
cent;  Arkansas,  increase  of  acreage  50  per  cent,  increase  of  crop  15 
per  cent — everywhere  the  same  story,  so  often  repeated,  that  an 
ncrease  of  acreage  is  not  accompanied  by  a  proportional  increase  of 
crop,  but  inevitably  by  such  an  increase  as  reduces  the  price  of  the 
product  in  a  ratio  quite  as  large  as  that  of  the  increased  cost  in  culti- 
vating the  larger  area.  Within  the  last  thirty  years  marked  changes 
have  occurred  in  the  localities  producing  the  largest  amounts  of  cotton. 
In  Texas  in  1860  San  Augustine  County  produced  31,000  bales,  which  was 
not  only  more  than  any  other  county  in  the  oak  and  hickory  region, 
but  more,  also,  than  any  other  county  in  the  State;  but  in  1890  this 
county  produced  only  4,000  bales.  The  attraction  of  the  western 
prairies,  and   the  fact  that   the  county  lies  off  the  lines  of  railroad 


CULTURE   OF   COTTON.  249 

communication,  in  part  account  for  this,  but  this  being  a  well- wooded  sec- 
tion lumbering  has  temporarily  diverted  attention  from  agriculture. 
Bossier  Parish,  in  Louisiana,  led  the  parishes  of  the  region  in  I860  with 
40,000  bales,  but  produced  only  29,000  in  1890.  Pickens  County,  Ala., 
led  in  that  State  with  29,000  bales  in  1800,  which  were  reduced  to 
18,000  in  1890.  Kemper  was  the  leading  county  of  the  region  in  Missis- 
sippi, with  a  crop  of  15,000  bales  in  1800,  which  fell  to  11,000  in  1890. 
Arkansas  alone  is  an  exception;  Jefferson  County  made  28,000  bales 
in  1860,  and  increased  the  crop  to  47,000  in  1S90. 

During  the  eleventh  decade  the  product  per  acre  decreased  in  this 
region,  and  it  recpiired  2.8  acres  at  the  close  of  the  period  to  make  a 
bale  which  had  been  done  on  2.5  acres  at  the  beginning.  This  decrease 
in  the  yield  per  acre  was  general.  There  was  also  a  small  decrease  in 
the  product  of  lint  per  capita  of  the  population,  which  stood  in  1880  at 
358  pounds  and  in  1890  at  351  pounds. 

There  was  an  increase  in  the  population  of  38  per  cent,  which,  while 
it  was  less  than  the  increase  in  the  cotton  acreage,  was  greater  than 
the  increase  in  the  cotton  crop.  Fifty-one  per  cent  of  the  population 
was  colored  in  1890,  which  was  1  per  cent  less  than  in  1880.  The  high, 
est  percentage  (5o)  of  colored  population  was  in  Louisiana,  which 
showed  an  increase  of  2  per  cent  during  the  decade,  and  the  lowest 
percentage  (30)  was  in  Alabama,  showing  a  decrease  of  10  per  cent 
since  1880.  There  was  a  slight  percentage  of  increase  in  Arkansas,  and 
a  slight  decrease  in  Mississippi  and  Texas. 

The  average  size  of  the  farms  decreased  during  the  eleventh  decade 
from  170  acres  to  136  acres.  This  decrease  was  general,  being  greatest 
in  Louisiana,  where  the  size  of  farms  fell  from  206  acres  to  124  acres, 
and  in  Arkansas,  where  the  decrease  was  from  167  to  141.  These  two 
States  had  an  increase  in  the  percentage  of  colored  population.  In  the 
other  States,  which  showed  a  decrease  in  the  percentage  of  the  colored 
population,  the  decrease  was  considerably  less.  The  number  of  small 
farms  of  50  acres  and  under  increased  from  31  to  34  per  cent,  and  the 
number  of  farms  occupied  by  owners  decreased  in  a  somewhat  greater 
proportion  from  67  to  62  per  cent.  The  decrease  iu  the  average  size  of 
farms,  the  multiplication  of  very  small  farms,  and  the  decrease  in  the 
occupancy  of  farms  by  their  owners,  stand  parallel  to  each  other,  and 
parallel  also  to  a  large  extent,  but  not  wholly,  with  the  increase  or 
decrease  of  the  percentage  of  the  colored  population  in  the  several 
localities.  The  significance  of  the  facts  are  that  the  white  proprietors 
are  turning  over  the  management  of  the  lands  to  the  small  colored 
farmers,  and  that  "40  acres  and  a  mule"  has  ceased  to  be  an  idle  dream 
of  the  freedman. 

Horses  on  the  farms  in  this  region  exceed  the  mules,  the  latter  out- 
numbering them  in  only  8  counties  in  Louisiana,  Mississippi,  Arkansas, 
and  Alabama,  out  of  the  89  counties  comprising  this  region.  The 
average  number  of  acres  of  improved  land  to  the  work  animal  was  23 


250  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

in  1890,  against  16  in  1880;  the  largest  number  was  36  acres,  in  Louisi- 
ana, and  the  smallest  18  acres,  in  Texas  and  Louisiana.  An  average  of 
2.4  bales  was  produced  to  the  work  animal,  ranging  from  3.7  bales  in 
Louisiana  to  0.9  of  a  bale  in  Texas. 

There  is  no  regular  system  of  rotation  of  crops  in  Texas.  Cotton  is 
alternated  with  corn  on  fresh  land  for  nine  or  ten  years  and  then  the 
land  is  planted  continuously  in  cotton  until  it  ceases  to  produce  600  or 
700  pounds  of  seed  cotton  to  the  acre,  when  it  is  abandoned  and  fresh 
land  planted.  On  the  Arkansas  oak  lands  cotton  is  not  infrequently 
planted  for  ten  years  in  succession.  Where  rotation  is  practiced  cot- 
ton is  followed  by  corn  and  then  oats,  when  peas  may  be  planted  or 
cotton  follow  on  the  oat  stubble.  There  is  seldom  any  fall  plowing, 
and  the  usual  practice  is,  after  knocking  down  the  cotton  stalks  or 
pulling  them  up  and  burning  them,  to  lay  off  in  the  middle  of  the  old 
row,  if  manure  or  fertilizer  is  to  be  used;  if  no  manure  is  applied  the 
land  is  simply  bedded  up  on  the  old  middle.  The  land  being  easy  of 
culture  for  the  most  part,  this  is  done  with  a  1-horse  plow.  Cotton- 
seed planters  have  come  into  very  general  use  since  1880.  When  the 
plant  appears  the  rows  are  barred  off  with  a  scrape  or  turn  plow,  the 
cotton  chopped  out,  and  the  dirt  thrown  back  to  it  either  with  a  turn 
or  shovel  plow  and  sometimes  with  a  scooter.  The  subsequent  plow- 
ings  are  done,  by  preference,  with  sweeps,  but  in  grassy  seasons  turn 
plows  and  shovels  are  used.  Two  to  three  hand  hoeings  and  three  to 
four  plo wings  are  required  before  the  crop  is  laid  by,  early  in  August. 
Deep  cultivation  is  said  in  Mississippi  to  prevent  the  plant  from  run- 
ning to  weed  and  to  favor  fruiting.  Close  and  deep  plowing  is  prac- 
ticed in  Louisiana  to  effect  this.  In  Texas,  root  pruning  is  thought 
efficacious;  it  is  done  by  running  a  deep  scooter  furrow  on  one  side  of 
the  row  and  after  an  interval  treating  the  other  side  in  the  same  man- 
ner. Topping,  early  planting,  and  rapid  cultivation  with  the  plow  are 
recommended  everywhere  to  check  growth  and  cause  the  plant  to  fruit. 
Late  cotton  is  thought  more  apt  to  run  to  weed,  and  also  cotton  that  is 
planted  close  in  the  drill.  It  will  be  seen  that  all  these  practices  are 
directly  the  reverse  of  what  is  done  in  Georgia.  In  Arkansas,  also,  it 
is  thought  boiling  is  promoted  by  planting  thick  in  the  drill,  and  run- 
ning to  weed  prevented  by  shallow  cultivation.  It  would  be  difficult 
to  reconcile  such  conflicting  methods  effecting  the  same  object.  What 
experience  has  taught,  however,  is  not  to  be  lightly  set  aside,  and  there 
might  be  risk  in  denying  that  root  cutting  in  the  lower  latitude  of 
Texas  did  not  modify  the  perennial  character  of  the  cotton  plant, 
dwarf  its  growth,  and  cause  its  energies  to  be  thrown  more  toward 
bearing  fruit;  or  that  this  perennial  character  being  already  restrained 
by  the  climate  of  the  higher  latitude  of  Arkansas,  fruiting  would  fol- 
low on  a  more  conservative  culture. 

The  value  per  acre  in  farms  of  these  lands  rose  from  $4.22  in  1880  to 
to  $5.94  in  1890.    This  value  was  greatest  in  Texas  ($7.07)  and  least  in 


CULTURE    OP    COTTON.  251 

Alabama  ($3.03).  The  average  value  of  all  the  agricultural  products 
per  acre  fell  from  $10.09  in  1880  to  $7.86  in  1890. 

The  estimates  of  the  cost  of  producing  a  pound  of  lint  cotton  in  1880 
were :  For  Arkansas,  9  estimates,  ranging  from  1  to  9  cents,  average  6.22 
cents;  for  Louisiana,  7  estimates,  ranging  from  4i  to  8  cents,  average 

6.8  cents;  for  Mississippi,  1  estimate,  4J  cents;  for  Texas,  12  estimates, 
ranging  from  3h  to  9£  cents,  average  6.1  cents. 

The  estimates  of  the  cost  of  producing  a  pound  of  lint  cotton  in  the 
oak  and  hickory  lands  in  1893  are:  For  Louisiana,  6  estimates,  varying 
from  5  to  10i  cents,  average  6.4  cents;  for  Arkansas,  5  estimates, 
ranging  from  5£  to  9  cents,  average  7  cents. 

BLUFF   AND   BROWN   LOA^I   TABLE-LANDS. 

This  region  lies  east  of  the  flood  plain  of  the  Mississippi  Eiver  and 
extends  eastward  to  the  oak  uplands.  It  reaches  from  Paducah,  on 
the  Ohio  Eiver,  to  Baton  Eouge,  in  Louisiana.  This  region  covers  more 
than  11,000,000  acres  and  produced  in  1890  6.8  per  cent  of  the  entire 
cotton  crop,  having  produced  in  1S80  10.4  per  cent.  During  this  period 
the  cotton  acreage  increased  21  per  cent,  very  nearly  double  the  rate  at 
which  the  population  had  increased,  and  the  crop  decreased  13  per  cent. 
The  area  in  farms  increased  from  74  to  77  per  cent,  it  being  the  most 
thickly  settled  region  of  the  cotton  belt,  except  only  the  Piedmont. 
The  improved  lands  increased  from  30  to  36  per  cent,  and  the  lands  in 
cotton  from  10  to  12  per  cent  of  the  whole  area.  The  percentage  of 
improved  land  in  cotton  (35)  was  the  same  as  in  1880,  but  it  required 

2.9  acres  to  make  a  bale,  which  was  made  on  2.1  acres  in  1880.  The 
largest  yield  was  in  Louisiana,  where  2.1  acres  produced  a  bale  in  1880 
and  1.6  in  1890.  The  cane  hills  of  Mississippi  made  nearly  as  much, 
producing  a  bale  to  1.7  acres  in  each  year.  The  summit  in  Tennessee 
made  the  lowest  yield,  2.3  acres  in  1880  and  4.2  acres  in  1890  being 
required  to  make  a  bale.  The  production  of  cotton  per  capita  was  431 
pounds  of  lint  in  1880  and  347  in  1890. 

Fifty-two  per  cent  of  the  population  was  colored  in  1890,  the  per- 
centage having  decreased  by  2  since  1880.  There  was  a  decrease  in 
the  proportion  of  colored  to  white  in  Tennessee  and  Louisiana  and  an 
increase  in  Mississippi,  where  it  formed  69  per  cent  of  the  population. 

Horses  outnumbered  the  mules  on  farms  in  38  out  of  the  76  counties 
in  this  region.  The  general  average  was  19  acres  of  improved  land  to 
the  work  animal,  ranging  from  23  acres  on  the  table-laud  of  Mississippi 
to  17  on  the  bluff  of  Louisiana.  Two  and  three-tenths  bales  were  pro- 
duced to  the  work  animal  in  1890  against  3.2  in  1880.  The  cane  hills 
in  Mississippi  produced  the  most,  5.3  bales  to  the  work  animal,  and  the 
summit  in  Tennessee  the  least,  0.7  bale. 

The  farms  averaged  114  acres  in  1880  and  fell  to  106  acres  in  1890. 
The  proportion  of  small  farms  remained  the  same,  but  the  percentage 
occupied  by  owners  fell  from  49  to  46.  More  were  rented  for  a  share 
of  the  crop  than  for  a  fixed  money  rental. 


252  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Broadcast  breaking  of  the  soil  is  rarely  done,  except  on  stubble  land 
or  land  that  has  been  out  of  cultivation  for  some  time.  After  cleaning 
off  the  stalks,  the  fertilizer  or  stable  manure,  when  any  is  applied,  is 
put  in  a  shovel  furrow  in  the  old  alley  and  bedded  on.  Cotton  is 
planted  in  ridges  3£  to  4  feet,  according  to  the  strength  of  the  land. 
Cultivation  commences  as  soon  as  the  plant  is  fairly  up  by  barring  off 
the  bed  with  a  scrape  or  turn  plow  and  sometimes  with  a  bull  tongue, 
The  cotton  is  then  hoed  out  and  the  dirt  returned  to  it  with  a  turn 
plow,  shovel,  or  sweep.  Sweeps  are  used  for  the  later  plo wings,  and 
the  cotton  is  usually  hand  hoed  before  each  plowing.  The  weed  grows 
larger  here  than  in  Georgia  and  the  Carolinas  and  is  not  so  heavily 
fruited,  the  seed  are  large,  and  the  ratio  of  lint  is  less.  It  is  said,  also, 
that  these  seed  yield  less  oil.  Under  these  circumstances  the  farmers 
are  especially  desirous  of  checking  the  growth  of  the  plant  and  induc- 
ing it  to  fruit,  particularly  in  wet  seasons.  Some  admit  that  there  is 
no  remedy  for  this,  but  many  are  persuaded  that  their  methods  are 
successful  in  attaining  this  end.  One  recommends  shallow  culture, 
cultivating  as  much  as  possible  with  the  hoe,  and  early  laying  by. 
His  neighbor  is  equally  sure  that  deep  culture  and  cutting  the  roots 
stops  the  overgrowth  and  promotes  fruiting.  Topping  is  generally 
spoken  of  as  good,  and  stable  manure  and  superphosphate  are  recom- 
mended. One  set  advise  that  the  dirt  be  thrown  to  the  plant,  and 
another  that  it  be  drawn  away.  Early  planting  and  early  thinning  are 
thought  by  others  to  be  effective. 

The  value  per  acre  of  land  in  farms  in  this  region  varied  in  1890  from 
$5.64  in  Louisiana  to  $10.92  in  brown  loam  of  Tennessee.  The  average 
for  the  region  was  $9.12  against  $8.16  in  1880. 

In  1880  four  estimates  of  the  cost  of  production  in  Mississippi  varied 
from  5i  to  10  cents  and  averaged  7.2  cents  per  pound  of  lint.  The 
estimates  in  Tennessee  varied  from  3£  to  10  cents  and  averaged  8£ 
cents. 

The  estimates  of  the  cost  of  production  in  1893  were,  for  Louisiana, 
6.23  to  7  cents  per  pound  of  lint;  for  Mississippi,  from  7  to  10  cents 
(average,  8.4  cents) ;  for  Tennessee,  7  cents. 

THE   ALLUVIAL   REGION. 

Extensive  areas  of  alluvial  lands  occur  in  every  Southern  State  and 
in  almost  every  region  of  every  State.  For  example,  in  South  Carolina 
there  are  400,000  acres  of  such  lands  below  the  falls  of  the  rivers,  all 
of  it  susceptible  of  drainage,  with  much  that  might  be  irrigated,  while 
scarcely  any  of  it  is  now  cultivated.  In  such  well-watered  States  as 
Arkansas  and  Louisiaua  there  is  scarcely  a  county  in  which  corre- 
spondents do  not  mention  the  cultivation  of  bottom  lands;  but  when 
the  alluvial  region  of  the  cotton  belt  is  spoken  of  it  is  meant  to  desig- 
nate the  bottom  lands  of  the  Mississippi,  the  Red,  and  the  Brazos 
rivers.    The  region  thus  located  contains  very  nearly  30,000,000  acres, 


CULTUKE    OF    COTTON.  253 

only  34  per  cent  of  which  is  in  farms,  12  per  cent  improved,  and 
6  per  cent  in  cotton,  producing  14.4  per  cent  of  the  entire  cotton  crop 
in  1890  and  14.6  per  cent  in  1880.  Thirty-five  per  cent  of  the  improved 
land  is  in  cotton,  and  no  change  in  this  regard  is  shown  since  1880. 
The  aggregate  increase  in  cotton  acreage  is  large,  01  per  cent  being 
added  to  the  acreage  of  1880,  which  was  accompanied  by  an  increase  of 
yield  of  only  29  per  cent,  something  more,  however,  than  the  increase 
of  the  population,  which  was  25  per  cent,  raising  the  per  capita  pro- 
duction from  368  pounds  of  lint  in  1880  to  393  pounds  in  1890.  The 
average  of  the  whole  region  was  a  bale  to  1.8  acres,  while  in  1880  this 
amount  was  produced  upon  1.4  acres,  a  decline,  but  still  a  yield  per 
acre  far  ahead  of  any  other  region  of  the  cotton  belt.  The  highest 
average  yield  in  1890  was  in  the  Louisiana  bottoms — a  bale  to  1.4 
acres;  and  the  highest  of  recent  years  was  on  these  same  bottoms  in 
1880 — a  bale  to  1.2  acres.  The  lowest  average  yield  in  1890  was  on  the 
alluvium  of  the  Red  River — a  bale  to  2.9  acres — while  the  same  lands 
produced  a  bale  to  1.8  acres  in  1880. 

Fifty-one  per  cent  of  the  population  is  colored,  a  decrease  here,  as  in 
every  other  region  except  the  oak  and  hickory,  since  1880.  It  stood 
then  at  57  per  cent.  The  percentage  of  colored  population  stood  high- 
est in  the  State  of  Mississippi,  where  it  had  increased  from  79  per 
cent  in  1880  to  83  per  cent  in  1890.  It  stood  lowest  in  the  Brazos  and 
Eed  river  bottoms,  declining  from  31  per  cent  in  1880  to  29  per  cent  in 
1890.  This  should  be  noted,  for  some  of  these  lands  have  the  reputa- 
tion of  being  the  least  suitable  of  all  for  a  white  population.  Their 
healthfulness  has  been  very  greatly  improved  on  the  Brazos  by  sink- 
ing artesian  wells.  In  some  places  pure  water  can  be  obtained  at  a 
depth  of  300  feet  and  at  a  cost  of  $75  to  the  well. 

In  the  swamps  of  Louisiana,  Mississippi,  and  Arkansas  the  first 
settlements  were  made  by  wealthy  planters  with  numerous  negro 
slaves,  and  here  the  colored  populations,  remaining  where  they  were 
planted,  on  the  most  fertile  soils,  preponderate  to  this  day.  The  later 
settlements  on  the  alluvium,  about  Crowleys  Ridge  in  Arkansas,  along 
the  Red  River  in  Texas,  and  in  the  tide-water  alluvium  of  Louisiana, 
were  made  chiefly  by  whites,  and  there  they  outnumber  the  colored  race. 
As  the  whites  preponderate  in  the  extreme  south  of  this  region  as  well 
as  in  the  north,  and  sometimes  in  the  central  portions,  as  in  Avoyelles 
Parish,  La.,  the  distribution  of  the  races  can  not  be  attributed  to 
climatic  causes.  There  is  no  foundation  for  the  prevalent  belief  that 
heat  or  moisture  or  malaria  has  caused  the  segregation  of  the  colored 
population.  It  was  effected  solely  by  economic  influences,  and  has 
been  maintained  by  a  race  prejudice  which  has  deterred  white  immi- 
grants from  occupying  many  of  the  most  fertile  sections  of  the  South. 

Mules  outnumber  the  horses  on  farms  in  the  alluvial  region,  and 
this  is  especially  true  where  there  are  large  colored  populations  as  in 
Mississippi  and  Louisiana;  horses,  on  the  other  hand,  outnumber  the 


254  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

mules  on  the  alluvium  of  the  St.  Francis  bottoms  in  Arkansas  and  in 
Texas,  where  the  proportion  of  colored  to  white  is  much  less.  There 
were  1(5  acres  of  improved  land  to  the  work  animal  in  1890  against  13  in 
1880.  This  increase  was  general  in  every  section.  The  largest  acreage 
was  in  the  State  of  Mississippi  (19  acres  against  17  in  1880)  and  the 
least  in  the  Eed  River  section  in  Texas  (14  acres  against  11  in  1880). 
There  was  an  average  of  3.G  bales  made  to  the  work  animal  in  each 
year.  In  Mississippi  and  in  the  alluvial  region  north  of  lied  River  in 
Louisiana  7.4  bales  were  made  to  the  work  animal,  and  in  the  tide- 
water alluvial  region  of  Louisiana  only  1  bale. 

The  average  size  of  farms  decreased  from  171  acres  in  1880  to  117 
acres  in  1890.  The  percentage  of  farms  of  50  acres  and  less  was  very 
considerably  increased.  At  the  same  time  the  percentage  of  farms  (as 
is  invariably  the  case)  occupied  by  owners  showed  a  decrease  from  49 
to  4G  per  cent.  The  increase  in  the  percentage  of  rented  farms  was 
especially  noticeable  where  the  colored  population  preponderated, 
rising  from  48  per  cent  in  1880  to  72  per  cent  in  Mississippi,  but  only 
from  44  to  50  per  cent  in  the  Red  River  section  of  Texas.  There  is 
reason  to  doubt  whether  the  figures  of  the  Eleventh  Census  represent 
the  changes  of  this  character  existing  in  1894.  A  much  larger  propor- 
tion of  the  lands  must  be  rented,  chiefly  for  a  share  of  the  crop.  So 
little  land  is  worked  by  hired  labor  that  in  some  sections  managers  of 
large  estates  have  no  rate  of  wages,  tenants  to  the  number  of  several 
hundred  cultivating  the  land  under  various  modifications  of  the  share 
system. 

Few  agricultural  regions  anywhere  present  so  fine  an  appearance  as 
these  alluvial  lands.  The  traveler  may  pass  for  miles  through  broad, 
level,  neatly  cultivated  fields,  extending  on  either  hand  from  1  to  2 
miles  and  walled  in  by  a  heavy  growth  of  tall  and  stately  forests.  The 
cotton  planters  are  gone,  but  the  cotton  plantations  remain  with  their 
comfortable  quarters,  formerly  for  laborers,  now  for  tenants,  so  numer- 
ous as  to  have  the  appearance  of  a  widely  scattered,  but  continuous 
village.  The  farmstead  in  a  group  of  pecan  trees,  with  the  manager's 
neat  cottage,  the  large  stables,  and  the  ginhouse  fitted  with  the  most 
modern  improvements,  have  a  prosperous  look.  At  rare  intervals  the 
handsome  residence  of  the  old  owner  may  be  seen,  but  it  wears  a 
deserted  look,  and  it  is  very  seldom  that  either  he  or  his  family  occupy 
it,  even  for  a  short  time.  They  have  moved  to  the  towns,  and  he  has 
taken  up  a  profession,  or  become  a  banker,  merchant,  cotton  factor,  or 
engaged  in  some  other  occupation  which  helps  him  to  support  his  plan- 
tation. There  is  everywhere  a  large  amount  of  fresh  land  cleared.  The 
tenants'  rents  are  remitted  for  such  clearings,  which  cost  the  owner 
little  outlay.  The  broom  sedge  of  the  abandoned  old  fields,  so  conspic- 
uous a  feature  in  the  landscape  of  the  uplands,  is  no  longer  seen  here. 
Outside  of  these  clearings,  the  chief  improvements  are  those  which  have 
been  made  in  the  levee  system  of  the  Mississippi  River.     Erevious  to 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON.  255 

the  year  1859  their  construction  was  chiefly  in  the  hands  of  local  boards 
of  planters,  and  no  decided  results  were  obtained.  In  1S79  the  Missis- 
sippi Eiver  Commission  was  organized,  and  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States  appropriated  $4,000,000  for  the  work.  Since  that  date  great 
progress  has  been  made  in  the  efforts  to  control  the  flood  waters  of 
the  Mississippi,  the  work  being  carried  on  by  Congress  in  conjunction 
■  with  State  and  local  boards.  The  latter  impose  local  taxes,  usually  so 
much  a  bale  for  each  bale  of  cotton  raised  in  the  district,  and  Congress 
adds  a  sum  equal  to  the  tax  raised.  Whether  this  work  when  com- 
pleted will  fulfill  all  the  expectations  that  are  entertained  for  it  remains 
to  be  seen.  These  lands  have  been  considered  inexhaustible  in  their 
fertility,  but  it  must  be  remembered  that  this  fertility  has  been  from 
time  to  time  renewed  by  the  floods  that  are  being  walled  out.  In  other 
alluvial  regions  farmers  who  have  dammed  out  the  river  freshets  have 
found,  after  some  seasons  of  cropping,  that  their  lands  were  becoming 
less  fertile. 

There  is  no  regular  system  of  rotation  of  crops.  Land  that  has  been 
planted  in  cotton  for  forty  successive  years  in  Bolivar  County,  Miss., 
produces  just  as  well  the  last  year  as  it  did  the  first.  Nevertheless,  a 
desultory  rotation  is  sometimes  practiced.  Cotton  is  followed  by  corn, 
and  after  corn  oats  are  put  in,  a  crop  of  peas  being  taken  after  the 
oats,  with  cotton  again  the  next  year.  In  Louisiana,  sugar  cane  and 
potatoes  are  sometimes  added  to  these  other  crops,  but  it  is  seldom  that 
cotton  is  left  out  for  more  than  one  year.  The  implements  of  agricul- 
ture used  are  like  everything  else  here — of  the  latest  and  most  improved 
pattern.  They  are  similar  to  the  implements  noticed  when  speaking  of 
the  Texas  prairies.  A  new  sulky  cultivator  with  disks — three  on  each 
side  of  the  row,  which  it  straddles  and  works  at  one  operation — is  being 
introduced  in  the  place  of  plows,  and  much  is  expected  of  it.  As  a  rule, 
the  early  cultivation  is  deep.  The  turn  plow  or  scrape  is  used  to  throw 
the  dirt  from  the  cotton,  and  after  it  is  hoed  and  thinned  to  return  the 
dirt  to  it.  There  are  three  to  four  hand  hoeings,  and  it  is  plowed  as 
frequently,  sweeps  and  various  harrows  being  used  later  in  the  season. 
Besides  the  universal  crab  grass,  coco,  or  nut  grass  (Gyperus  rotundus), 
gives  great  trouble.  After  being  shaved  off  with  the  hoe  or  plow  it 
resumes  its  growth  immediately,  and  adds  considerably  to  the  cost  of 
culture.  Harrowing  is  thought  the  most  effective  means  of  tearing  the 
roots  and  nuts,  and  the  effort  is  made  to  cover  it  with  dirt  from  the 
plow  instead  of  cutting  it  off,  for,  in  the  first  case,  it  is  found  that 
leaves  rot  off  before  it  grows  again.  The  land  is  generally  left  clean 
and  nearly  level  when  the  crop  is  laid  by.  The  efforts  to  promote 
fruiting  and  prevent  the  plant  from  running  to  weed  are  the  same  as 
those  already  noticed — as  various  and  as  conflicting.  A  single  subsoil 
colter  furrow  run  in  the  middle  of  the  row  is  the  only  new  sugges- 
tion, both  sides  of  the  row  having  been  treated  in  a  similar  way  by 
others.  A  few  admit  that  there  is  no  remedy  when  a  warm,  wet  season 
supervenes. 


256  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

The  usual  wages  are  50  cents  a  day,  or  50  cents  per  hundred  weight, 
for  picking  cotton.  Very  few  laborers  are  hired  by  the  month  or  the 
year.  As  has  been  said,  most  of  the  land  is  rented  for  money — $3  to  $5 
an  acre,  formerly  for  as  much  as  $10 — or  is  worked  on  shares  of  the 
crop.  The  laborers  are  furnished  with  a  house,  fuel,  and  garden,  and 
when  the  law  requires  stock  to  be  fenced  in  a  pasture  is  inclosed  for 
their  stock.  There  is  no  charge  for  this,  and  only  such  supplies  as  are 
advanced  are  charged.  In  some  sections  it  is  customary  to  pay  $5  an 
acre  for  the  area  of  cotton  a  hand  plants  and  cultivates  up  to  the  time 
of  laying  by.  Picking  is  paid  for  extra,  and  so  is  any  other  work  out- 
side of  the  acres  contracted  for.  The  very  low  prices  of  the  last  season 
have  induced  employers  to  discuss  the  propriety  of  reducing  this  wage 
to  $3.50  an  acre.  When  it  is  remembered  that  field  work  does  not 
commence  often  until  March,  that  all  other  work  is  paid  for  at  the  rates 
of  day  labor,,  that  unlimited  hunting  and  fishing  is  allowed,  in  an  excel- 
lent game  country,  and  that  all  the  perquisites  mentioned  are  enjoyed 
by  the  laborer  for  an  entire  year,  it  does  not  seem  that  his  lot  is  a  hard 
one.  They  look  well  dressed  and  well  fed,  but  very  few  of  them  have 
availed  themselves  of  their  opportunities  to  become  the  owners  of  land, 
while  the  white  laborers,  who  work  side  by  side  with  them  on  the  same 
footing — Germans  and  Italians — find  little  difficulty  in  achieving  this, 
even  when  they  have  to  pay  $30  to  $40  an  acre  for  land.  In  1890 
Washington  County,  Miss.,  produced  87,000  bales  of  cotton,  an  amount 
larger  than  that  produced  by  any  county  in  the  cotton  belt  at  that  date. 
This  was  at  the  rate  of  a  bale  to  1.4  acres.  In  the  same  year  Tensas 
Parish,  La.,  made  an  average  of  a  bale  to  1.1  acres,  but  the  aggregate 
crop  only  amounted  to  40,000  bales,  a  great  falling  off  from  the  crop  of 
1860,  which  mounted  up  to  140,000  bales,  a  yield  not  yet  equaled  any- 
where, and  shows  to  a  limited  extent — for  the  country  was  new  in 
I860 — the  capacity  of  those  lands  for  producing  cotton  on  a  large  scale 
under  thorough  management. 

The  average  value  per  acre  of  land  in  farms  in  this  region,  as  esti- 
mated in  the  last  census,  was  $14.48,  a  rise  from  the  estimated  value  in 
1880,  which  was  $9.70.  The  increase  was  greatest  in  the  Eed  Eiver 
country  of  Texas,  where  the  lands  rose  from  $7  to  $17  an  acre. 

The  cost  of  production  in  1880  per  pound  of  lint  was :  Mississippi, 
28  estimates,  varying  from  5  to  9  cents,  average  7.4  cents ;  Louisiana,  9 
estimates,  varying  from  5£  to  9  cents,  average  7.4  cents ;  Texas,  5  esti- 
mates, varying  from  3  J  to  7  cents,  average  5.2  cents;  Arkansas,  7  esti- 
mates, varying  from  4  to  10  cents,  average  7  cents. 

The  cost  of  production  for  1893  is  given  as  follows :  Mississippi,  5 
estimates,  varying  from  6.3  to  11^  cents,  average  8.3  cents;  4  esti- 
mates, excluding  rent,  vary  from  3.9  to  8.2  cents,  average  5.5  cents; 
Louisiana,  3  statements,  from  4f  to  5|  cents,  average  4.9  cents;  Arkan- 
sas, 1  estimate,  4  cents. 


CULTURE  OF  COTTON.  257 

RED-LOAM  LANDS. 

These  lauds,  comprising  in  all  something  over  13,000,000  acres  and 
producing  2.G  per  cent  of  the  cotton  crop  in  1890  and  a  larger  percentage 
(3.3)  in  1880,  are  fouud  east  and  west  of  the  Mississippi  River.  The 
largest  section  occurs  in  Arkansas,  where  they  rise  in  concentric 
terraces  from  each  bank  of  the  Arkansas  River  to  the  height  of  2,000 
feet  above  sea  level  and  cover  over  10,000,000  acres.  The  cotton  crop 
there  was  190,000  bales  in  1S90,  ah  increase  of  22  per  cent  ou  the  crop 
of  1S80.  It  required,  however,  an  increase  of  8G  per  cent  in  acreage 
to  effect  this.  One  and  seven-tenths  acres  made  a  bale  in  1S80,  and 
2.6  in  1890.  The  size  of  the  farms  remained  the  same,  averaging  105 
acres  in  each  year.  Only  31  per  cent  of  the  farms  were  under  50  acres, 
and  the  number  rented  was  also-  a  good  deal  below  the  average,  but 
they  increased  7  per  cent  during  the  eleventh  decade.  Only  8  per  cent 
of  the  population  was  colored  in  1880,  but  increased  during  the  decade 
to  13  per  cent.  The  number  of  horses  on  farms  exceeded  that  of  mules 
in  20  counties,  and  the  mules  outnumbered  the  horses  in  2  other 
counties. 

Ten  estimates  of  the  cost  in  1880  of  producing  a  pound  of  lint,  varied 
from  3.45  cents  to  8.5  cents;  average,  0.19  cents. 

The  eastern  counterpart  of  the  red  loam  of  Arkansas  is  found  in  the 
2,500,000  acres  in  the  central  basin  of  Tennessee.  The  cotton  crop 
here  fell  to  10,504  bales  in  1890,  from  47,085  bales  in  1880,  although  the 
acreage  only  decreased  11  per  cent.  Ninety-nine  per  cent  of  this  basin 
is  in  farms,  a  larger  proportion  than  anywhere  else  in  the  cotton  belt; 
61  per  cent  is  in  improved  land — again  a  larger  proportion  than  else- 
where in  the  cotton  belt — and  only  3.7  per  cent  of  the  area  was  planted 
in  cotton.  Another  notable  exceptiou  to  the  change  occurring  else- 
where is  that  here  we  find  the  only  instance  where  the  farms  increased 
in  size.  A  very  slight  increase,  it  is  true,  onl  y  106  acres  iu  1890  against 
104  in  1880,  but  in  line  with  the  average  increase  of  3  acres  which  took 
place  during  that  period  in  the  size  of  the  farms  of  the  United  States 
at  large.  The  number  of  farms  under  50  acres  decreased  14  per  cent, 
which  is  exceptional  also;  but  the  number  rented  obeyed  the  general 
tendency,  and  showed  a  small  increase.  It  required  2.4  acres  to  make 
a  bale  in  1880  and  4.2  acres  in  1890. 

The  population  was  37  per  cent  colored  in  1880  and  fell  to  33  per  cent 
in  1890.  Horses  were  more  numerous  on  the  farms  in  7  counties,  and 
mules  iu  2. 

THE    VALLEY   REGION. 

The  Unaka  and  Cumberland  valleys  in   southeast  Tennessee  and 

northwest  Georgia,  together  with  the  valleys  of  the  Coosa  in  Alabama 

and  of  the  Tennessee  River  in  that  State  and  in  Tennessee,  have  been 

grouped   under   what  is   called   the  valley  region,  including  nearly 

1993— No.  33 17 


258  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

15,000,000  acres,  much  of  which  is  too  elevated  to  be  planted  in  cotton. 
In  1890  the  area  in  cotton  exceeded  795,000  acres,  an  increase  of  41  per 
cent  on  the  acreage  of  1880,  showing  that  cotton  growing  has  made 
progress  in  these  altitudes,  although  the  product  fell  9,000  bales  short 
of  what  it  was  in  1880.  In  that  year  4.2  per  cent  of  the  entire  cotton 
crop  was  grown  here ;  ten  years  later,  but  3.1  per  cent.  In  the  first  year  a 
bale  was  made  to  2.3  acres,  and  in  the  last  to  3.4  acres.  The  larger  part 
of  the  crop  is  grown  in  Alabama.  This  region  is  too  widely  scattered 
and  the  importance  of  its  various  divisions  of  too  little  consequence  to 
the  production  of  cotton  to  justify  a  detailed  mention  of  them.  It  is  to 
be  noted,  however,  that  some  of  the  very  best  staples  of  upland  cotton 
is  produced  here.  Forty  bales  raised  in  northwestern  Georgia  were 
quoted  in  New  Orleans  and  also  in  Boston,  in  January,  1895,  at  3£  and 
3f  cents  above  ordinary  uplands  of  the  same  grade. 

THE   ALPINE   REGIONS. 

These  lands  are  found  in  North  Carolina,  South  Carolina,  Georgia, 
Tennessee,  Arkansas,  and  Texas,  and  produce  about  0.9  per  cent  of 
the  entire  cotton  crop.  The  conditions  of  culture  are  so  various  as  to 
preclude  general  description,  and  they  are  not  of  sufficient  importance 
to  require  a  detailed  description.  Mention  of  other  cotton-growing 
localities  must  also  be  omitted  for  similar  reasons,  and  have  not  been 
included  in  any  of  the  general  statements  that  have  been  given. 
Among  these  is  Florida,  where  the  largest  cotton  crop  ever  made  was 
only  65,000  bales,  a  crop  smaller  than  that  of  several  counties  of  the 
cotton  belt;  Missouri,  that  one  year  grew  as  much  as  20,000  bales; 
Virginia,  that  never  reached  that  figure;  Illinois,  that  made  1,482  bales 
in  1860;  Kansas,  that  made  212  bales  in  1890;  Kentucky,  that  made  its 
largest  crop  of  1,367  bales  in  1880;  Indiana,  that  made  14  bales  in  1850; 
New  Mexico,  that  made  19  bales  in  1860;  Utah,  that  produced  136 
bales  in  the  same  year;  and  California,  that  made  34  bales  in  1870. 
Of  very  much  greater  consequence  are  the  cotton  crops  of  Indian  Ter- 
ritory and  Oklahoma,  but  data  are  wanting  in  regard  to  them.  Esti- 
mates of  them  were  included  in  the  returns  made  for  Texas  in  1880  and 
1890,  and  it  is  very  probable  that  they  were  underestimates.  The  crop 
in  1894  was  estimated  at  over  112,000  bales.  The  number  and  wide  dis- 
persion of  these  localities  show  the  enormous  extension  that  might  be 
given  to  cotton  growing  in  the  United  States  if  there  were  a  profitable 
margin  between  the  price  and  the  cost  of  production. 

GENERAL    OBSERVATIONS   ON    COTTON   CULTURE. 

The  matter  of  the  first  consideration  in  the  culture  of  cotton,  as  in 
that  of  any  other  crop,  is  to  prevent  the  removal  of  the  soil  by  washing. 
Everywhere  in  the  hill  country  neglect  in  this  regard  has  resulted  in 
the  denudation  of  the  soil  from  extensive  areas  of  cultivated  fields, 
rendering  them  barren,  and  devastating  other  fields  lying  at  a  lower 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON.  259 

level.  Kor  does  the  injury  stop  here.  The  public  roads  become  conve- 
nient channels  along  which,  to  their  destruction,  these  muddy  floods  at 
last  pour  into  the  streams,  damming  them  up,  causing  freshets,  and  con- 
verting fertile  bottoms  into  miasmatic  marshes.  The  evil  is  generally 
recognized,  and  to  some,  but  to  a  wholly  inadequate  extent,  remedies 
are  applied  by  terraces  and  hillside  plowing.  Where  this  is  thoroughly 
done,  and  persisted  in,  it  has  proved  eminently  successful.  A  very 
common  error  has,  however,  attended  the  practice.  It  is  that  some 
fall  should  be  given  the  line  of  the  terrace,  to  allow  the  water  to 
escape.  The  result  is,  that  while  one  gully  may  be  cured  by  such  a 
terrace,  a  larger  amount  of  water  is  concentrated  at  its  lower  terminus, 
and  another  and  larger  gully  created  there.  The  terrace  should  be  on 
an  exact  level,  and  must  from  time  to  time  be  amended,  on  account  of 
changes  occurring  in  the  spaces  betwen  the  terraces.  A  spirit  level 
may  be  used  to  establish  the  line  of  terrace,  but  a  simpler,  cheaper,  and 
more  accurate  implement  is  a  compass,  made  of  light  stuff',  and 
strengthened  with  a  crossbar.  The  legs  should  be  15  feet  apart  at  the 
ground,  coming  together  7  feet  above  it.  At  the  apex  a  cord  is  sus- 
pended, with  a  weight  attached  to  act  as  a  plumb  bob.  When  the  feet 
are  on  a  level,  the  place  where  the  plumb  cord  crosses  the  bar  is 
marked.  In  stepping  off  the  terrace  the  level  will  be  exact  when  the 
plumb  line  corresponds  with  the  mark  on  the  crossbar.  It  would  seem 
proper  that  legislation  should  compel  owners  on  the  higher  levels  to 
restrain  the  rains,  which,  falling  on  their  fields,  issue  in  destructive 
floods  on  their  neighbors'  at  a  lower  level.1 

DRAINAGE. 

The  usual  substitute  for  drainage  in  the  cotton  field  is  putting  the 
plants  on  a  high  bed  and  cultivating  them  deep.  It  is  an  expensive 
substitute,  and  the  rice  and  sugar  planters  along  the  border  of  the 
cotton  illustrate  with  ample  object  lessons  the  benefits  and  methods 
of  drainage.  The  trouble  is  that  the  original  outlay  for  drainage  is  con- 
siderable, while  the  makeshifts,  though  in  the  end  more  costly,  are  within 
the  reach  of  the  small  cultivator.  It  would  seem  desirable  for  the  legis- 
lature to  establish  some  equitable  method  of  adjusting  a  right  of  way 
for  outlet  ditches. 

INCLOSURES. 

Many  strong  arguments2  have  been  brought  against  fencing  in 
cultivated  fields  and  allowing  stock  freedom  of  range,  and  many  laws 
modifying  the  old  practice  have  been  passed  in  recent  years.  Per- 
haps nowhere  has  so  radical  a  change  been  effected  in  this  regard  as 
in  South  Carolina,  where  it  is  required  that  stock  be  kept  in  fenced 
inclosures  and  heavy  penalties  imposed  when  they  trespass.  This  law 
has  promoted  the  cultivation  of  large  areas  of  land.     Since  its  passage 

1  U.  8.  Dept.  of  Agr.,  Farmers'  Bui.  No.  20. 

2  U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agr.  Rpt.  1871. 


260  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

2,500,000  acres,  or  74  per  cent  more  land,  have  been  brought  under 
cultivation,  adding  largely  to  the  cotton  crop,  while  the  grain  crops 
have  increased  only  half  as  much.  In  the  face  of  the  increased  area 
under  culture,  the  increased  crop,  the  larger  population,  and  the 
greater  wealth,  there  has  been  an  absolute  decrease  of  23  per  cent 
of  horned  cattle,  26  per  cent  of  hogs,  and  33  per  cent  of  sheep.  It 
has  assisted  in  the  development  of  a  one-sided  husbandry,  and  to 
the  diminution  of  agricultural  values — the  value  of  land  among  the 
others. 

SUBSOILING. 

Subsoiling  and  deep  breaking  are  open  to  question.  There  is  no 
question  that  a  deep,  mellow  soil  is  to  be  preferred,  but  the  efforts  to 
obtain  it  are  limited  by  the  cost,  by  the  risk  of  injury  to  some  soils 
through  leaching,  and  to  others  by  bringing  sterile  earth  to  the  sur- 
face. Sandy  soils  may  suffer  in  the  first  way,  and  heavy  clays  in  the 
second.  Experiments  to  determine  the  value  of  these  operations  are 
conflicting  and  inconclusive. 

ROTATION. 

Rotation  of  crops  opens  a  wide  field  of  inquiry.  The  usual  practices 
have  been  noticed,  and  the  value  of  broad  leaved  and  narrow-leaved 
plants  or  root  crops  and  crops  maturing  above  ground  in  rotations 
might  be  mentioned,  but  there  is  an  absence  of  exact  knowledge  here, 
which  is  a  cause  of  much  distrust.  The  rotation  of  growths  observed 
everywhere  in  nature  shows  its  necessity,  but  this  rotation  differs  with 
every  slight  variation  of  soil,  and  nothing  is  accurately  known  about 
it.  Such  knowledge  would  have  to  go  far  beyond  the  theory  of  the 
exhaustion  of  certain  fertilizing  constituents  of  the  soil.  It  would 
have  to  deal  with  hosts  of  living  animal  and  vegetable  friends  and 
foes  who  fight  for  or  against  each  growing  crop  and  render  changes 
necessary.  , 

The  farmer's  mind  grows  confused  over  the  complicated  conditions  of 
this  great  struggle,  and  after  vainly  attempting  to  understand  and  con- 
form to  them,  he  withdraws,  turns  his  fields  over  to  nature,  and  lets 
them  "rest."  And  nature,  resuming  her  work  of  growing  heavier  and 
heavier  crops  every  year,  restores  the  fertility  which  man  has  destroyed 
by  his  exhaustive  culture.  Even  Peter  Henderson,  the  great  gardener, 
said  rest  was  necessary  to  his  gardens  once  in  five  years. 

Exhaustion  of  the  soil  differs  in  intensity,  but  for  the  most  part  it  is 
only  temporary.  Fields  considered  utterly  used  up  and  thrown  out  for 
years  when  cultivated  again  have  produced  better  than  those  which 
have  been  under  a  management  more  or  less  careful.  JSTevertheless  this 
temporary  exhaustion  must  inevitably  occur  in  every  soil  not  treated 
to  restoratives,  notwithstanding  that  full  crops  of  cotton  have  been 
grown  on  some  soils  for  more  than  forty  successive  years. 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON.  261 

PLANTING  AND   CULTIVATION. 

Bedding  up  land  previous  to  planting  is  universally  practiced. 
Where  manures  are  drilled  in,  this  is  indispensable.  It  forms  a  warm 
seed  bed  in  the  cool  weather  of  early  spring  and  possesses  other  advan- 
tages. The  plants  are  usually  left  2  to  3  inches  above  the  middle  of 
the  row,  which  in  4-foot  rows  gives  a  slope  of  an  inch  to  the  foot. 
This  causes  the  plow  in  cultivating  to  lean  from  the  plants,  to  go 
deepest  in  the  middle  of  the  row,  and,  as  a  consequence,  to  cut  fewer 
roots. 

Four  feet  is  the  usually  accepted  distance  between  the  rows.  The  dis- 
tance between  the  plants  seems  of  little  importance  within  the  limits  of 
8  to  14  inches.  Still,  as  nothing  but  cotton  stalks  will  make  cotton,  it 
is  unsafe  on  average  land  to  risk  wider  spans  than  1  foot.  ISTothiug 
conclusive  has  been  settled  about  checked  cotton.  It  may  save  a  hoe- 
ing, which  should  cost  about  30  cents  au  acre,  and  as  plowing  is  done 
at  about  the  same  cost  the  question  of  saving  is  not  determined.  The 
skillful  use  of  the  hoe  does  the  most  accurate  and  thorough  work. 
Good  crops  are  made  with  the  hoe  without  using  the  plow  at  all.  It 
may  be  said  that  cotton  growing  was  originally  established  entirely  by 
hoe  culture,  even  the  soil  for  planting  being  prepared  with  the  hoe. 

The  perfect  cotton  planter  is  not  yet  invented.  It  should  drop  five 
or  six  seed  in  a  single  line  at  regular  intervals,  say  a  foot  apart.  In 
very  dry  seasons  a  narrow  and  deep  coulter  furrow,  the  dirt  closing  in 
behind  it,  is  run  immediately  in  advance  of  the  planter.  It  freshens 
up  the  bed  and  assists  very  much  the  germination  of  the  seed. 

Much  is  said  about  deep  and  shallow  culture,  and  many  believe  that 
they  can  affect  the  plant  beneficially  by  practicing  the  one  or  the  other. 
The  only  certainty  is  that  all  grass  and  weeds  must  be  vigorously  kept 
down,  and  that  the  capillary  pores,  through  which  the  moisture  escapes 
after  rains,  must  be  broken.  The  first  is  most  thoroughly  effected  by 
a  broad,  sharp  sweep,  which  takes  everything  it  meets,  while  going 
shallower  than  most  other  plows.  Harrows  and  cultivators  are  apt  to 
be  turned  aside  by  stubborn  bunches  of  grass,  which  thus  escape  them. 
But  the  sweep  does  not  distribute  the  loose  dirt  as  generally  as  a  light 
harrow  does  and  therefore  is  not  as  effective  in  the  mulching  process. 
The  effect  of  cutting  roots  depends  entirely  upon  the  season  that  fol- 
lows the  operation.  The  following  experiments  will  show  how  difficult 
it  is  to  arrive  at  results  in  this  matter.  In  the  month  of  June,  the  cot- 
ton plants  being  18  inches  high,  dirt  was  drawn  up  G  inches  around 
some;  it  was  drawn  away  to  the  depth  of  G  inches  from  others;  the 
roots  of  others  were  cut  all  round  close  to  the  stalk  to  the  depth  of  G 
inches,  and  the  next  stalks  had  all  the  roots  cut  off  below  G  inches. 
These  last  wilted  in  a  few  moments  from  this  heroic  treatment,  but 
neemed  to  recover  in  a  few  days.  A  rainy  season  ensued,  a  vigorous 
growth  set  in,  and  when  the  crop  matured  no  difference  could  be 
observed  in  the  fruitfuluess  of  the  different  series  of  plants. 


262  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

The  date  of  cotton  planting  reaches  from  March  1  to  June  10.  Cotton 
is  seldom  planted  at  the  latter  date,  except  when  put  in  after  a  crop  of 
oats.  A  good  crop  is  made  when  the  season  is  especially  favorable,  but 
the  occurrence  of  drought  makes  it  exceedingly  uncertain.  The  plants 
also  are  more  liable  to  the  attacks  of  caterpillars,  which  only  make 
their  appearance  in  force  late  in  tlie  season.  They  prefer  to  feed  on 
the  younger  and  fresher  stalks,  and  it  was  thought  in  some  sections 
that  the  frequent  recurrence  of  the  cotton  worm  was  in  some  degree 
promoted  by  the  late  planting  of  cotton  after  oats,  which  was  much  in 
vogue  at  one  time.  At  least  they  were  not  so  bad  after  it  was  aban- 
doned or  before  it  was  commenced.  The  last  regular  planting  is  May 
20  under  the  mountains  in  Georgia.  The  following  are  the  dates  in  the 
various  sections: 

Planting  commences  March  1  in  southern  Texas;  March  15,  middle 
Louisiana,  Texas  coast;  March  20,  southern  Mississippi;  March  25, 
South  Carolina  coast,  pine  hills  of  South  Carolina  and  Georgia,  mid- 
dle Mississippi;  April  1,  Mississippi  bottoms,  middle  Texas,  southern 
Arkansas;  April  5,  northwest  Georgia;  April  7,  middle  Arkansas; 
April  10,  west  Tennessee,  Piedmont,  North  Carolina,  South  Carolina, 
Georgia,  upper  Alabama,  north  Arkansas,  upper  Texas;  April  20, 
northern  Louisiana;  May  20,  northeast  Georgia. 

The  first  blooms  appear  May  15  in  southern  Texas;  May  20,  central 
Louisiana;  May  25,  central  Texas,  southwest  Georgia;  June  1,  Missis- 
sippi bottoms,  southern  Arkansas,  middle  Georgia;  June  10,  pine  hills 
South  Carolina,  middle  Alabama,  central  Georgia,  Tennessee;  June  20, 
northwest  Louisiana,  middle  Arkansas,  northwest  Georgia,  southern 
North  Carolina;  July  4,  northern  Arkansas,  northern  Texas;  July  10, 
northeast  North  Carolina;  July  25,  northwest  Tennessee. 

The  first  bolls  open  May  15  in  southern  Texas;  June  25,  middle 
Texas;  July  1,  south  Louisiana;  July  10,  middle  Louisiana;  July  15, 
southern  Georgia,  pine  hills  South  Carolina;  August  1,  nortliwest 
Louisiana,  south  Arkansas,  coast  North  Carolina;  September  1,  Pied- 
mont, North  Carolina,  red-loam  prairies  Texas;  September  15,  north 
Arkansas. 

Picking  commences  July  10  in  southern  Texas;  August  1,  southern 
Louisiana,  central  Texas;  August  15,  pine  hills  South  Carolina,  coast 
of  Georgia  and  South  Carolina,  Mississippi  uplands;  August  25,  north- 
west Louisiana,  Mississippi  bottoms;  September  1,  north  Texas,  coast 
of  North  Carolina,  northwest  Georgia;  October  1,  northwest  Texas, 
north  Arkansas. 

PERIOD    OF    GROWTH. 

The  following  data  relating  to  the  above  and  other  important  points 
in  the  life  of  the  cotton  plant  are  from  records  carefully  kept  in  South 
Carolina,  near  Augusta,  Ga. 

Of  100  seed  planted,  10  in  a  hill,  March  29, 1887,  24  came  up  of  which 
2  died,  39  could  not  be  found  and  were  probably  eaten  by  insects,  23 
rotted,  and  14  seemed  sound  but  failed  to  germinate. 


CULTURE  OF  COTTON.  263 

The  first  plant  appeared  in  14  days  after  planting;  the  10  hills  were 
up  to  a  complete  stand  in  18  days,  and  no  seed  came  up  after  30  days. 
This  season  was  cool  and  wet,  but  in  very  dry  seasons  seed  may  lie  m 
tlie  ground  from  April  1  to  June  10,  and  then  come  up  to  a  good  stand. 
The  third  leaf  made  its  appearance  in  8  days  after  the  plant  came  up 
and  in  22  days  after  the  seed  was  planted;  the  fourth  leaf  appeared 
the  day  following.  The  significance  of  this  observation  is  that  after 
the  true  leaves  appear,  the  plant,  being  no  longer  dependent  on  the  seed 
leaves  for  its  supply  of  nourishment,  is  not  so  liable  to  injury  from  cold. 

Other  series  of  seed  were  put  in  the  ground  at  later  dates  and  the 
following  observations  recorded  from  day  to  day:  The  first  form 
(bud)  was  seen  on  a  plant  coming  up  in  April,  41  days  after  the  plant 
appeared,  and  53  days  after  it  was  planted.  For  all  the  other  plants 
coming  up  in  April,  the  average  was  40  days  to  the  form,  ranging  from 
34  to  45  days,  appearing  earlier  in  the  warmer  weather  and  later  in  the 
cooler  weather.  For  plants  coming  up  in  May,  the  average  was  29  days 
from  the  appearance  of  the  plant  to  the  first  form,  ranging  from  25  to  39 
days,  to  which  8  days  may  be  added,  to  show  time  from  planting  to 
forming.  Forms  appearing  in  May  bloomed  in  21  to  32  days,  average 
25  d'ays;  forms  appearing  in  June  bloomed  in  20  to  27  days,  average  24 
days;  forms  appearing  in  July  bloomed  in  20  to  26  days,  average  24 
days;  forms  appearing  in  August  bloomed  in  21  to  27  days,  average 
25  days.  Blooms  appearing  in  June  made  open  bolls  in  45  to  5G  days, 
average  52  days;  blooms  appearing  in  July  made  open  bolls  in  64  to  71 
days,  average  65  days;  blooms  appearing  in  August  made  open  bolls  in 
46  to  58  days,  average  52  days.  Forms  on  May  24  made  open  bolls 
August  9 ;  forms  on  June  24  made  open  bolls  September  21 ;  forms  on 
July  24  made  open  bolls  October  8;  forms  on  August  24  made  open 
bolls  November  9.  As  killing  frosts  occur  about  November  17,  it  would 
seem  that  the  latest  blooms  that  can  be  counted  on  would  be  about 
September  1.  From  this  it  follows  that  the  minimum  period  from  plant- 
ing to  the  first  open  boll  is  120  days,  and  that  the  maximum  period 
is  157  days.  The  interval  of  37  days  between  these  periods  is  more 
than  sufficient  to  fix  a  full  crop  of  fruit  if  the  condition  of  the  weather 
is  favorable  to  the  plant  at  the  fruiting  stage. 

SHEDDING   OF   FORMS,    BLOOMS,    AND    BOLLS. 

When  the  weather  is  not  favorable  at  the  fruiting  stage,  the  other- 
wise hardy  cotton  plant  displays  its  greatest  weakness.  It  sheds  its 
forms,  its  blooms,  and  often  its  half-grown  bolls.  The  following  table, 
condensed  from  the  daily  record  above  referred  to,  represents  to  some 
extent  the  loss  occasioned  in  this  manner.  The  plants  having  received 
very  careful  attention,  the  loss  exhibited  is  a  good  deal  below  the  aver- 
age sustained  in  ordinary  field  culture. 


264 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


Proportion  of  forma  which  produce  holla. 


Date  of  coming  up 

April 

May 

June 

July 


Num- 

Forms. 

Blooms 

Bolls     | 

ber  of 

ami  bolls 

matur- 

plants. 

Appeared. 

Died. 

Blocmed.  dropping. 

ing. 

7 

1,700 

1,231 

4G9 

ig:j 

30G 

10 

2,580 

1,819 

667 

199 

408 

2 

154 

106 

48 

12 

S6 

1 

GO 

24 

36 

19 

7 

Per  cent 
matur- 
ing. 

18 
18 
23 
11 


The  1,580  bolls  picked  before  September  10  weighed  20.5  pounds,  or 
about  77  bolls  to  the  pound;  432  bolls,  picked  September  10,  weighed 
5.75  pounds,  or  75  bolls  to  the  pound;  203  bolls,  picked  October  5, 
weighed  3  pounds,  or  07  bolls  to  the  pound ;  103  bolls,  picked  October 
21,  weighed  3.5  pounds,  or  110  bolls  to  the  pound.  The  average  for  the 
whole  season  was  85  bolls  to  the  pound. 

These  plants  were  fertilized  at  the  rate  of  036  pounds  to  the  acre,  one- 
fourth  acid  phosphate  and  three-fourths  cotton-seed  meal.  They  were 
planted  in  1-foot  rows,  18  inches  between  the  hills,  which  would  give 
0,3G0  plants  to  the  acre.  If  an  acre  had  fruited  as  these  20  plants  did, 
and  every  forDi  had  stuck  and  matured  into  an  average  boll,  the  yield 
would  have  been  25,052  pounds  of  seed  cotton  to  the  acre,  a  yield 
undreamed  of.  As  it  turned  out,  they  actually  produced  at  the  rate  of 
4,100  pounds  to  the  acre,  a  yield  that  has  seldom,  if  ever,  been  attained. 
Such  calculations  show  how  misleading  it  is  to  apply  estimates  on 
small  patches  to  field  crops,  but  it  also  shows  that  much  more  might  be 
obtained  by  greater  care  and  precision. 

A  more  thorough  study  of  the  cotton  plant  might  discover  means  to 
obviate  this  great  waste.  At  present  cotton  growers  are  at  a  loss  to 
form  a  correct  idea  of  the  cause  or  to  apply  any  effectual  remedy.  A 
week  or  two  before  cotton  opens,  sometimes  a  month,  the  crop  being 
clean,  field  work  stops.  Formerly  much  important  work  of  repairs  and 
improvement  was  done  during. this  interval.  jSTo\v  the  hands  that  w^re 
engaged  in  cultivating  the  crop  are  discharged  and  no  work  except 
what  is  absolutely  indispensable  is  done. 


Cotton  picking  is  the  most  tedious  and  expensive  operation  in  cotton 
growing.  The  picking  of  the  crop  of  1801  is  estimated  to  have  cost  not 
less  than  $60,000,000.  The  most  of  the  picking  was  paid  for  at  50  cents 
per  hundredweight,  and  planters  in  Texas  who  grew  as  much  as  2,500 
bales  said  it  had  cost  them  $9  a  bale  to  gather  their  crops.  It  is  very 
light  work,  at  the  most  pleasant  season  of  the  year,  and  it  is  effectively 
performed  by  women  and  even  by  small  children,  as  well  as  by.  men. 
In  the  early  days  of  this  culture  the  amounts  of  cotton  picked  were 
small.  It  is  related  in  the  Southern  Cultivator  that  the  report  that  a 
young  man  had  picked  100  pounds  in  a  day  created  great  excitement 
among  the  farmers  in  Georgia,  who  came  from  far  and  near  to  see  it 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON.  265 

done  and  gave  a  barbecue  in  honor  of  the  achievement.  For  a  long 
time  this  has  been  a  low  average  for  ordinary  pickers. 

As  early  as  1839  there  is  a  record  of  80  hands — men,  women,  and  chil- 
dren, old  and  young — averaging  over  133  pounds  of  seed  cotton  apiece 
a  day.  In  October,  1891,  10  convicts  of  the  Mississippi  penitentiary 
picked  in  5J  days  18,340  pounds  of  cotton,  a  daily  average  of  333  pounds 
per  man.  The  picking  season  will  average  in  duration  at  least  100  days, 
and  picking  at  the  above  rate  would  turn  out  22  bales  to  the  hand.  It 
has  never  been  assumed  that  one  man  could  cultivate  more  land  than 
would  make  10  bales,  so  that  one  man  is  able  at  average  full  work  to 
gather  as  much  as  two  can  make.  This,  however,  is  very  far  from  being 
the  case,  and  in  the  Mississippi  bottoms  the  same  year  it  was  not  unusual 
to  hear  of  tenants  and  space  workers  who  did  not  gather  during  the 
whole  season  as  much  as  a  bale  to  each  picker  in  their  families.  Strikes 
among  cotton  pickers  are  not  made  by  combination,  but  they  are  exe- 
cuted as  effectually  and  destructively  by  individuals.  It  is  very  diffi- 
cult to  get  them  to  work  until  the  cotton  is  fully  open,  and  it  is  hard 
to  stimulate  them  to  pick  over  100  pounds  a  day.  The  damage  re- 
sulting from  slack  work  here  is  often  very  serious,  due  iu  part  to  the 
loss  of  some  cotton  by  falling  out,  and  to  an  equal  extent  to  the  injury 
to  the  quality  of  that  which  is  gathered,  the  staple  being  soiled  by  dust 
and  stained  by  the  coloring  matter  from  the  bolls.  It  has  been  thought 
that  the  production  of  cotton  would  be  limited  by  the  amount  that  could 
be  gathered.  This  limit  is  still  remote.  Excluding  the  population  of 
towns  and  villages,  who  do  a  considerable  share  in  cotton  picking,  and 
deducting  one-third  for  children  under  11  years  of  age,  there  remains 
an  exclusively  rural  population  in  the  cotton  States  of  over  6,800,000, 
all  more  or  less  occupied  in  cotton  growing  and  capable,  at  the  low  aver- 
age of  luO  pounds  a  day,  of  picking  daily  more  than  450,000  bales,  or 
the  very  large  crop  of  1894  in  20  or  21  days;  and  if  they  did  the  same 
task  during  the  whole  season  they  could  gather  four  or  five  times  as 
.much  as  the  largest  crop  yet  made. 

Much  skill  and  capital  have  been  expended  in  efforts  to  make  a 
machine  that  would  pick  cotton.  It  can  not  be  said  that  any  has 
proved  successful  in  solving  a  problem  that  seems  about  equal  to  that 
of  gathering  strawberries  or  raspberries  by  machinery.  This  could  be 
done  if  it  were  not  for  the  injury  to  the  berries;  and  if  they  were  to 
be  made  into  jam,  perhaps  assorting  and  washing  machines  might  be 
invented  to  utilize  a  portion  of  the  harvest.  Cotton-picking  machines 
gather  limbs,  leaves,  and  bolls,  and  pass  the  whole  through  a  cleaning 
separator  that,  it  is  claimed,  leaves  the  cotton  in  the  condition  of  aver- 
age cotton  picked  by  hand.  A  cotton-picking  machine  with  a  driver 
and  two  horses,  taking  a  row  at  a  time,  would  go  over  about  G  acres 
a  day.  The  cost  of  the  work  of  an  expensive  and  complicated  machine, 
as  this  must  necessarily  be,  would  hardly  be  less  than  $5  a  day,  and  if 
the  cotton  were  Gathered  at  the  right  staa;e  there  should  not  be  more 


266  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

than  200  pounds  to  the  acre  open.  Cotton  left  in  the  field  for  a  fuller 
opening  than  that  is  liable  to  serious  damage,  and  in  case  of  storms 
to  almost  total  loss.  The  machine  would  thus  gather  at  the  most  1,200 
pounds  a  day  at  a  cost  of  41.G  cents  per  hundredweight,  the  present 
cost  being  from  40  to  50  cents,  and  so  highly  paid  at  that  that  there  is 
little  doubt  it  will  be  reduced  to  30  cents  or  less  (as  it  has  been  already 
in  some  localities),  and  even  then  expert  pickers  will  earn  from  $1  to 
$1.50  a  day  and  more. 

In  improving  short  staple  cotton  there  is  a  growing  tendency  to 
develop  varieties  which  take  on  and  opeir  all  their  fruit  at  nearly  the 
same  time.  If  such  a  variety  were  perfected,  it  would  simplify  the  gath- 
ering by  machinery,  especially  as  such  varieties  at  present  shed  their 
leaves  about  the  time  the  cotton  begins  to  open,  thus  removing  the 
character  of  trash  which  it  is  more  difficult  to  separate  than  either 
the  stems  or  the  bolls. 

COST  OF   COTTON   PRODUCTION. 

The  cotton  crop  that  it  is  possible  to  grow  and  gather  has  been 
shown  to  have  no  practical  limits,  either  in  the  area  of  land  on  which  it 
can  be  cultivated  or  in  the  labor  available  to  gather  it.  It  may  be 
added  that  one-fifth  of  the  horses  and  mules  at  present  on  farms  in  the 
cottou  States  would  suffice  to  cultivate  the  largest  crop  that  has  ever 
been  put  in.  More  laud  can  always  be  prepared  and  planted  by  a  given 
amount  of  horsepower  than  can  be  cultivated  by  it.  The  practical 
limit  is  the  amount  of  land  a  work  animal  can  cultivate  between  May  5 
and  August  1.  From  the  87  days  of  this  period  something  over  12 
must  be  deducted  for  Sundays,  and  as  there  is  an  average  of  28  days' 
rain  at  this  season  in  the  cotton  belt  on  which  no  plowing  can  be  done, 
deduction  must  be  made  for  these  also,  leaving  40  working  days.  Four 
plowings,  sometimes  more,  must  be  given  in  good  cultivation,  which 
would  leave  Hi  days  for  each  plowing.  A  day's  work  being  3  acres,  the 
horse  would  work  34i  acres.  By  following  out  this  calculation  a  good 
idea  of  the  cost  of  production  under  present  conditions  of  cotton  culture 
may  be  obtained.  To  prepare  the  land  it  should  be  broken  up  at  the 
rate  of  an  acre  a  day,  but  as  this  is  rarely  done  more  than  once  in  three 
years,  one- third  only  is  to  be  charged,  say,  11  days'  work  on  this  account; 
the  laying  off,  bedding,  dragging  off,  and  planting  will  require  a  little 
over  nine-tenths  of  a  day's  work  per  acre,  or  33^-  days'  work  in  all  to 
prepare  and  plant,  making  a  total  before  cultivation  commences  of  44£ 
days'  work.  To  this,  if  Sundays  are  added  and  rainy  days  as  before,  it 
will  sum  up  to  07  days,  and  adding  the  87  days  for  cultivation,  the  total 
is  154  days'  work  of  a  horse  to  cultivate  a  full  crop  of  cotton.  But 
it  remains  to  haul  the  crop  to  the  gin.  Estimating  the  crop  at  the 
average  crop  of  the  cotton  belt  for  the  last  eleven  years,  viz,  531 
pounds  of  seed  cotton  to  the  acre,  the  mule  would  have  to  move  18,319 
pounds  from  the  34£  acres;  at  four  loads  of  800  pounds  a  day  there 
would  be  0  days'  work;  in  all,  160  days  in  a  year. 

The  cost  of  a  horse,  counting  insurance,   feeding,   stabling,  and 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON.  267 

interest,  together  with  the  wear  and  tear  of  such  gear  and  implements 
as  are  used  in  the  cultivation  of  cotton,  is  fully  covered  by  $122.85  per 
annum.  For  the  portion  of  the  year  the  animal  is  engaged  in  the 
cotton  crop  this  would  be  853.92.  The  wage  of  the  plow  hand  for  the 
crop  niaj*  be  put  at  $61.  Four  hoeings  would  cost  for  the  31i  acres 
$55.20,  making  the  total  cost  to  date  of  picking  and  cultivating  34J 
acres  in  cotton  8173.12.  Picking  the  amount  stated  above,  as  an  aver- 
age crop,  would  cost  $73.27.  In  all,  the  cost  for  delivering  at  the  gin- 
house  18,319  pounds  of  seed  cotton  would  be  $216.39,  or  1.314  cents 
per  pound. 

If  fertilizers  are  used  at  the  rate  they  were  used  in  1890  in  Georgia 
and  South  Carolina,  $1.78  an  acre  must  be  added  on  that  account, 
bringing  it  up  to  $307.80,  or  1.68  cents  per  pound  of  seed  cotton. 

It  remains  to  mention  rent,  taxes,  and  management.  As  the  latter 
consists  almost  wholly  in  seeing  that  advances  are  charged  against  the 
laborers  and  in  collecting  such  due  as  it  is  not  difficult  to  get,  5  per 
cent  commissions  on  the  profits  would  be  a  fair  allowance.  Taxes  are 
so  inconsiderable  that  they  do  not  merit  notice.  With  rent  it  is  dif- 
ferent; economic  rent  does  not  exist  in  this  country;  the  most  usual 
rent  has  been  a  portion  of  the  crop,  and  one-fifth  to  one-fourth  of  the 
cotton  produced  has  been  paid.  Xevertheless  rents  have  differed  a 
good  deal;  in  the  east  $2  to  $3  has  been  a  fair  average;  in  the  west,  in 
the  Mississippi  bottoms  and  the  black  prairies  it  has  run  from  $1  to 
$10  an  acre.  The  low  prices  of  cotton  have  changed  this,  and  in  some 
sections,  even  of  the  black  prairies  of  Texas,  tenants  have  been  notified 
by  merchants  that  they  could  not  advance  to  them  in  1895  if  they  paid 
a  money  rent  exceediug$3  an  acre.  It  is  safe  to  say  that  this  year  an 
average  rent  is  $1.50  an  acre  in  the  east  and  $3  in  the  west.  The  first 
amount  is  to  be  added  to  the  cost  of  production  where  fertilizers  are 
used,  and  the  latter  where  they  are  not  used.  This  addition  makes  the 
cost  of  a  1-horse  crop  exclusively  in  cotton  in  the  east  sum  up  to  $359.55, 
or  to  1.96  cents  per  pound  of  seed  cotton;  in  tlie  west  the  result  will  be 
$319.89  for  a  similar  crop,  or  1.88  cents  per  pound  of  seed  cotton.  This 
would  be  very  nearly  a  cost  of  5.88  cents  per  pound  of  lint  in  the  east 
and  5.68  cents  in  tbe  west  for  cotton  delivered  at  the  ginhouse,  the  cost 
of  ginning  and  packing  remaining  to  be  counted,  the  value  of  the  seed 
more  than  sufficing  for  this  in  both  instances.  The  seed  commands  a 
higher  price  in  the  east,  and  would  tend  by  its  sale  to  render  the  cost 
more  equal.  Though  worked  out  by  a  different  method,  these  results 
will  be  found  to  differ  little  from  an  average  of  tbe  various  estimates 
already  given.1  Tbe  percentage  of  tbe  cost  of  labor  on  tbe  total  cost 
of  production  is  53  per  cent  in  the  east  and  55  per  cent  in  the  west. 
This  is  a  much  higher  ratio  of  the  cost  of  labor  than  will  be  found  in 


'It  should  be  clearly  understood  that  none  of  these  estimates  do  more  than  indi- 
cate the  probable  cost  of  cotton  production,  assuming  certain  prices  and  conditions 
which  may  or  may  not  obtain  iu  any  given  case.  They  may  approximate  the  average 
cost  of  production  under  present  systems  of  cotton  culture  in  the  South,  but  they  by 
no  means  show  the  minimum  of  cost  under  the  most  improved  methods. — Ed. 


268  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

most  other  industries.  In  averaging  the  percentage  of  the  cost  of 
labor  to  total  cost  in  10  cotton  mills  taken  at  random  from  among  the 
Northern  mills,  and  the  same  number  from  the  Southern,  the  first  is  33 
per  cent  and  the  second  22  per  cent.  Labor  is  thus  seen  to  be  the  pre- 
dominant element  in  cotton  growing. 

Modern  improvements  in  machinery,  which  have  so  wonderfully 
affected  most  industries,  have  only  indirectly  benefited  agriculture, 
and  cotton  culture  as  little  as  any  branch  of  this  pursuit.  Great  im- 
provements have  been  made  iu  agricultural  machinery,  but  the  share 
worker  and  small  tenant,  even  the  one-horse  farmers,  whose  numbers 
are  rapidly  multiplying  in  the  cotton-growing  region,  are  not  able  to 
avail  themselves  of  such  helps.  The  improved  implements  are  as  a 
rule  the  property  of  another  class,  and  the  profit  from  their  use  goes 
almost  exclusively  to  their  owners. 

It  costs  as  much  in  human  labor  to  prepare,  plow,  hoe,  and  pick  an 
acre  of  cotton  now  as  it  did  half  a  century  ago,  and  if  the  product  is 
increased  by  the  successful  use  of  commercial  fertilizers,  such  use 
necessitates  an  increase  of  labor  in  the  preparation  for  and  the  culture 
and  gathering  of  the  product.  On  the  other  hand,  the  agricultural 
laborer  finds  in  strikes  no  resource  to  benefit  him.  The  seasons  inex- 
orably fix  the  day  and  hour  when  his  services  are  needed ;  if  he  allows  it 
to  escape  him,  it  is  gone  once  for  all,  and  with  it  disappears  the  product 
out  of  which  alone  wages  are  paid.  The  employer  also  can  not  resort 
to  lockouts.  The  manufacturer  may  suspend  operations  and  lose  little 
besides  the  interest  on  his  plant.  Such  a  suspension  even  for  a  brief 
period  of  farm  work  would  mean  the  loss  of  the  entire  season's  work. 

The  small  farmers,  working  on  a  narrow  margin,  are  always  in 
imminent  need  of  cash,  and  cotton  is  the  only  crop  that  never  fails 
of  a  ready  cash  sale.  Every  pound  of  it  can  be  readily  disposed 
of  by  the  producer  for  cash,  and  at  the  prices  quoted  in  the  mar- 
kets of  the  world.  All  other  crops,  unless  grown  upon  a  scale  suit- 
able for  shipment  in  bulk — a  scale  seldom  within  the  reach  of  the 
small  farmer — are  subject  to  the  vicissitudes  of  the  local  market,  easily 
overstocked,  and  often  inflicting  heavy  loss  on  the  producer  of  perish- 
able commodities. 

The  general  testimony  is  that,  while  farmers  growing  cotton  exclu- 
sively are  in  very  bad  condition  financially,  those  who  raise  food  and  for- 
age crops,  and  especially  those  who  in  addition  raise  their  work  animals, 
are  everywhere  prosperous.  The  chief  reason  of  this  is,  as  has  been 
shown,  that  the  exclusive  cotton  grower  fails  to  employ  the  most 
important  forces  in  farm  work,  the  work  animals  and  the  land,  to  the 
fullest  extent.  He  draws  upon  the  surplus  of  a  single  crop  made  in 
part  of  the  year  for  the  means  to  support  his  farm  during  the  whole  year. 
There  is  a  saving  in  using  unemployed  time  and  capital  to  produce 
necessaries  which  otherwise  must  be  paid  for  in  money.  The  tendency 
to  pay  greater  attention  to  food  and  forage  crops  has  been  much 
accelerated  by  the  low  price  of  cotton  since  1890. 


CULTUEE    OF    COTTON. 


269 


COTTOX    PRODUCTION   IN   DIFFERENT   STATES. 

The  usual  method  pursued  in  collecting-  and  arranging  the  data  of 
cotton  production  has  been  to  do  this  by  States.  The  attempt  has  been 
made  in  this  article  to  marshal  these  data  in  what  seemed  to  be  the 
important  natural  subdivisions  or  regions  of  the  cotton  belt  without 
confining  them  within  State  lines.  These  natural  subdivisions  are  sub- 
stantially those  adopted  by  Professor  Hilgard  in  his  work  on  cotton 
culture  for  the  Tenth  United  States  Census.  It  was  thought  that  these 
regions  of  the  cotton  belt  possessed  well-marked  characteristics  of  soil, 
growth,  products,  climate,  and  methods  of  culture,  together  with  racial, 
social,  and  industrial  peculiarities,  all  of  which  were  influenced  only 
in  a  very  small  degree  by  the  political  boundaries  of  the  States.  There- 
fore it  would  seem  that  the  understanding  of  these  real  and  natural 
regions  is  more  important  to  a  knowledge  of  the  conditions  of  cotton 
culture  and  production  than  the  artificial  political  framework  of  the 
States.  But  as  the  production  of  cotton  by  States  maybe  of  inteiest, 
the  following  data  are  given: 

Percentage  of  cotton  crop  grotvn  in  eacli  State. 


State. 


1799.  1809.  1819.  1829.  1839.  1849.  1859.  1869.  1879.  1889.  1S90.  1891.  1892.  1893.  1894. 


Texas 

Georgia 27. 

Mississippi 

Alabama 

Arkansas 

South  Carolina 44. 

Louisiana 

North  Carolina 11. 

Tennessee 3. 

Florida 

Others 13. 


25.0 
6.2 
12.5 


50.0 
2.5 
8.5 
4.0 


10.0 


27.5 
6.3 
6.2 

11.3 


5.0 


100.0  100.0  100.0 


21.4 
13.3 
14 
1, 

18.3 
12.4 

4.7 
12.0 


2.0 


20.6 
24.6 
14.7 
0.7 
7.8 
19.3 
6.5 
3.1 
1.5 
1.2 


2.4 

20  2 

19.6 

22.8 

2.7 

12.2 

7.3 

2.9 

7.9 

1.9 

0.1 


8.  01 
13.0 
22.  41 
18.5: 

6  8| 
6.5| 

14.5 
2  7 
5.5 

'  1.2 
0.9 


11.6 
15.  6: 
18.8' 
14.3 

8.2; 

7.  3J 
11.6 
4.6| 
6.0 

1.3 

0.7l 


14.2 
14.2 
16.7 
12.3 
10.5 
9  1 
8  8 
6.8 
5.8 
0.9 
0.7 


19.8 
16.0 
15.8 
12.2 
9.3 
10.0 
8.9 
4.5 
2.5 
0.7 
0.3 


23.0 
14.6 
14.6 
12.2 
9.6 
8.8 
7.3 
4.3 
2.5 
0.6 
3.1 


100.0  100.0  100.0  100.0  100.0 


26.8 
13.4 
13.9 
11.9 
8.8 
8.7 
7.0 
5.4 
3.6 
0.3 
0.2 


31.1 
14.0 
11.3 
11.0 
7.9 
9.4 
5.0 
5.5 
3.9 
0.6 
0.3 


27.3  33.1 

14.9;  13.2 

12.1  12.1 

12.3  10.1 

8. 4  8.  6 


9.9 
5.4 
5.6 
3.4 
0.6 
0.1 


8.0 
6.0 
4.7 
3.5 
0.6 
0.1 


100.  0  100.  0 


The  above  table  presents  a  general  view  of  the  order  of  development 
of  cotton  growing  in  the  different  States.  It  shows  the  extraordinary 
expansion  of  the  industry  in  the  extreme  West,  but  the  success  with 
which  the  Eastern  States  have  kept  up  their  ratio  of  percentage  to  the 
whole  crop  for  half  a  century  demonstrates  the  deep  root  this  culture 
has  taken  in  those  States. 

Average  annual  yield  per  acre  of  cotton  in  different  States. 


Pounds  of  lint  cotton  per  acre. 

1 

a 

218 

215 
206 
208 
252 
373 
383 
335 
229 
254 

ca 

a 

'3 

140 
134 
122 
110 
150 
182 
142 
124 
126 
139 

6 

CD 

State. 

-£  i  to 

OO    00 

C5    O 
L-    OO 

OO    OO 

OO 
OO 

OO 

GO 

175 
'134 
'122 
120 
186 
254 
244 
221 
194 

157 

-*   o 

OO    OO 
OO    OO 

174  176 
138  148 
124  146 

'110  125 
170  175 
243  224 

'142  175 
193  209 
174  172 
150  165 

CD 

OO 
OO 

157 
140 
137 
130 
178 
221 
200 
240 
171 
162 

t~ 

OO 
OO 

196 

168 
158 
135 
196 
228 
163 
233 
168 
T77 

OO 

OO 

OO 

202 
155 
159 
136 
192 
206 
lfi-l 

OO 
OO 

'140 
180 
170 
165 

200 
252 
183 

o 

OO 

2218 
2215 
197 
165 
230 
293 
233 
290 
198 
220 

o 

OO 

194 

204 

180 

179 

2  252 

2  373 

260 

2  335 

225 

247 

<N 

c: 
OO 

183 
184 
160 
135 
190 
260 
291 
265 
172 
205 

CO 

a 

OO 

168 
108 
169 
200 
190 
256 
239 
188 
165 
194 

-* 

O) 

180 

201 
2  200 
2  208 

208 

357 
2  383 

227 
2  229 
'254 

> 
< 

N.  Carolina.. 
S.  Carolina. . . 

Georgia 

Alabama 

Mississippi .. 
Louisiana 

153  151 
137  144 
124  136 
111  135 

'150  185 
199  195 
150  204 

'124  200 
133  154 

'139  171 

195  198 
172  185 
140  163 
136  154 
202  172 
263 ' 182 
167  230 
263  215 
204  203 
177.  188 

180 
183 
152 
150 
190 
235 
240 
243 
170 
200 

178 
162 
155 
146 
192 
249 

O90 

Arkansas 

Tennessee  . . . 
Cotton  belt  . . 

230 
169 
169 

201 
U26 
172 

244 
172 
183 

1  Minimum  yield. 


2  Maximum  yield. 


270 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


This  table  is  an  approximate  estimate  of  the  product,  in  pounds,  of 
lint  cotton  per  acre  of  each  State.1  For  the  first  eight  years  recorded 
the  average  yield  was  1G8  pounds  lint  per  acre;  for  the  ninth  year  it 
was  177  pounds,  and  for  the  eight  succeeding  years  204  pounds  of  lint 
per  acre.  The  improvement  seems  to  have  been  very  uniform  in  all  the 
States.  The  maximum  yields  have  been  made  in  the  last  five  years 
and  the  minimum  yields  in  the  years  previous.  It  goes  to  show  that 
there  is  a  steady  and  progressive  improvement  in  the  culture  of  cot- 
ton which  must  distance  foreign  competition.  It  Avill  be  noticed  that 
the  difference  between  the  maximum  and  minimum  yields  is  greatest 
in  the  States  making  the  greatest  yields,  which  are  also  those  States 
that  have  entered  most  recently  on  cotton  growing.  The  fluctuations 
are  largely  due  to  the  variations  in  the  seasons.  Thus,  in  Xorth  Caro- 
lina the  minimum  and  maximum  yields  stand  side  by  side  in  the  years 
1889  and  1890.  It  seems,  however,  by  no  means  probable  that  the 
steady  increase  in  the  yield  per  acre  is  in  any  considerable  degree  due 
to  more  favorable  seasons. 

The  following  table  gives  the  United  States  Department  of  Agricul- 
ture estimates  of  the  total  production  of  cotton  in  the  different  cotton- 
producing  States  during  the  years  1894  and  1895 : 

Cotton  crops  of  1S94  and  1895,  by  Stales  and  Territories. 


States  and  Territories. 

Acres. 

Bales. 

Bales  per  acre. 

1894. 

1895. 

1894. 

1895. 

1894. 

1895. 

2.  664,  861 

1,  483,  319 
201,  621 

3,  610,  968 
233,  898 

168 

8,243 

1,313,296 

2,  826,  272 

63,  696 
1,  296,  522 

28,  992 

2, 160,  391 

879,  954 

6,  854,  621 

2,371,726 
1, 186,  655 

191,540 
3,  069,  323 

212,  847 
40 

1, 142,  568 
2,487,119 

47,  772 
1,050,183 

26,  093 

1,  814,  728 

712,763 

5,  826,  428 

400 

44,  623 

854, 122 

709,  722 

48,  005 

1, 183, 924 

104,  887 

67 

2,685 

721,591 

1, 167,  881 

24, 114 

454,  920 

13,  001 

818,  330 

286,  630 

3,  073,  821 

663,  916 

520,  860 

38,  722 

1,  067,  377 

68,  668 

15 

0.  32 
.48 
.24 
.33 
.45 
.40 
.33 
.55 
.41 
.38 
.35 
.45 
.38 
.33 
.45 

.21 

0.28 

.44 

.20 

.35 

.32 

.38 

513,  843 

1,  013,  358 

11,  816 

397,  752 

14, 103 

764,  700 

172,  560 

1,  905,  337 

103 

7,964 

.45 

.41 

.25 

.38 

.54 

South  Carolina 

.42 
.24 

.33 

Utah 

.26 

61, 128 

12,  735 

.18 

Total 

23,  687,  950 

20,184,808 

9,476,435       7,161,094 

.40 

.35 

Note. — The  figures  given  in  this  table  were  secured  by  a  method  adopted  by  this  Department 
in  September,  1894,  with  the  view  to  giving  the  planter  reliable  information  as  to  the  crop  of  the  year 
before  the  beginning  of  the  following  season.  The  cooperation  of  all  railway  and  water  transporta- 
tion companies  and  cotton  mills  operating  in  the  cotton  States,  as  well  as  all  custom-houses  and 
several  thousand  cotton  buyers,  merchants,  and  ginners  in  those  States,  was  secured  in  reporting 
data  relating  to  the  movement  and  consumption  of  cotton  and  interior  stocks  on  hand.  The  estimates 
from  data  thus  secured  are  made  as  follows:  The  movement  from  all  interior  points  in  each  State  across 
itsboundaries  is  carefully  investigated,  and  themovementto  the  ports  of  a  State  is  included  with  the 
movement  from  the  State,  because  practically  all  receipts  at  ports  in  the  cotton  section  are  ultimately 
shipped  coastwise  to  Eastern  points  or  exported.  Prom  the  reserve  stocks  of  the  State  the  cotton  at 
its  ports  is  therefore  excluded,  being  already  accounted  for  in  the  railway  and  water  movement. 
Further  deduction  is  necessarily  made  of  cotton  shipped  from  one  cotton  State  to  interior  points 
in  another.  In  the  season  1894-95  the  movement  was  followed  from  September  1, 1894,  to  April  1, 1895 ; 
in  1895-96  it  was  followed  during  the  entire  season,  from  September  1,  1895,  to  August  31,  1896. 

]The  data  are  obtained  from  the  United  States  Census  returns  for  the  years  1879 
and  1889,  from  the  reports  of  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture,  from 
Latham,  Alexander  &  Co.'s  Cotton  Movement,  and  from  Shepperson'o  Cotton  Facts. 


CULTURE  OF  COTTON.  271 

EXPERIMENTS  IN  COTTON  CULTURE  BY  THE  EXPERIMENT 

STATIONS. 

The  agricultural  experiment  stations  in  the  cotton  belt  have  con- 
ducted relatively  few  held  experiments  on  cotton  culture,  their  work 
in  this  line  having  been  largely  confined  to  the  best  distance  between 
the  plants  and  the  effects  of  topping.  While  the  results  of  these  experi- 
ments have  not  been  conclusive,  some  of  them  afford  suggestions  of 
value  to  the  planter  and  the  experimenter.  The  following  brief  sum- 
mary, prepared  by  Mr.  J.  F.  Duggar,  of  this  office,  presents  an  outline 
of  the  work  of  the  stations  in  this  line,  with  references  to  the  published 
reports : 

In  a  single  test  at  the  Alabama  Canebrake  Station,  planting  on  high 
beds  resulted  in  a  larger  yield  than  was  obtained  with  flat  beds  on  a 
black  slough  bottom,  a  kind  of  soil  which  is  very  retentive  of  water. 
There  was  only  a  very  slight  difference  in  yield  between  ridges  made 
on  an  unbroken  center  and  those  formed  by  bedding  on  a  center  furrow. 
The  usual  recommendation  of  the  stations  is  to  plant  on  low  or  flat- 
tened ridges.1 

At  Camden,  Ark.,  on  a  field  previously  planted  in  corn,  a  larger 
yield  was  obtained  by  breaking  the  land  and  then  forming  the  beds 
than  by  making  the  ridges  without  previous  plowing,  the  difference 
being  292  pounds  of  seed  cotton  per  acre.  On  ridges  made  in  February 
the  yield  was  slightly  greater  than  on  those  made  just  before  planting 
in  May.2 

Subsoiling  proved  profitable  in  one  test  made  at  Athens,  Ga.;  and  in 
the  same  locality  results  favored  planting  later  than  April  10.3 

At  the  Alabama  Canebrake  Station  cotton  growing  on  tile-drained 
land  was  in  most  seasons  more  productive  than  on  undrained  land.4 

The  depth  and  extent  of  the  root  growth  of  a  plant  furnish  sugges- 
tions as  to  methods  of  preparing  and  tilling  the  soil.  At  the  South 
Carolina  Station  the  taproot  of  the  cotton  plant  extended  to  a  depth  of 
more  than  3  feet  when  the  plant  was  grown  on  a  light  sandy  soil,  with 
subsoil  of  the  same  character.  On  a  loam  with  a  more  compact  sub- 
soil the  taproot  terminated  abruptly  as  soon  as  the  hardpan  was  encoun- 
tered at  a  depth  of  9  inches  below  the  surface.  At  the  Alabama  College 
Station  the  taproot  penetrated  vertically  to  a  depth  of  12  inches,. or  3 
inches  into  the  subsoil,  its  course  then  becoming  horizontal. 

In  South  Carolina  it  was  observed  that  most  of  the  lateral  roots 
commenced  about  3  inches  below  the  surface,  and  never  went  below  the 
upper  9  inches  of  soil. 

1  Alabama  Canebrake  Sta.  Bui.  4. 
-Arkansas  Sta.  Bui.  28. 

3Proc.  Georgia  State  Agl.  Soc,  Feb.  1874.  p.  67. 

4  Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  4  (1887),  Bui.  3  (1888);  Alabama  Canebrake  Sta.  Buls. 
11  and  14. 


272 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


In  a  garden  soil  of  sandy  drift  and  pebbles  the  Alabama  Station 
found  a  young  cotton  plant  3{  inches  high  having  one  of  its  lateral 
roots  3  feet  4  inches  long,  the  end  of  the  root  being  only  3  inches  below 
the  surface.  Almost  identical  measurements  were  made  of  the  roots 
of  a  young  cotton  plant  at  the  Arkansas  Station.  In  Alabama,  from  a 
cotton  plant  2  feet  high  and  just  beginning  to  bloom,  one  lateral  root 
extended  more  than  5  feet.  Some  of  the  lateral  roots  began  only  1J  or  2 
inches  below  the  surface.  The  position  of  the.  roots  was  such  that  the 
experimenter  estimated  that  the  usual  deep  cultivation  would  have 
destroyed  four-fifths  of  the  lateral  roots  which  extended  at  right  angles 
to  the  row. 

In  this  we  have  a  strong  hint  as  to  the  superiority  of  shallow  over 
deep  cultivation,  a  superiority  which  was  proved  by  experiments  ex- 
tending over  several  years  at  the  Alabama  College,  Alabama  Cane- 
brake,  Georgia,  and  Mississippi  stations.  We  find  only  two  instances 
in  which  shallow  culture  failed  to  afford  a  larger  yield  than  deep 
culture.1 

At  the  Georgia  Station  an  experiment  to  determine  the  best  distance 
between  cotton  plants  was  conducted  in  five  different  years.  The 
rows  were  uniformly  4  feet  wide,  and  the  attempt  was  made  to  leave 
single  plants  either  1,  2,  3,  or  4  feet  apart  in  the  drill.  It  generally 
happened,  however,  that  the  stand  was  much  more  imperfect  on  the 
plats  planted  close  than  on  the  others.  This  is  equivalent  to  saying 
that  the  least  average  distance  between  plants  was  somewhat  greater 
than  12  inches.  The  following  table  gives  the  yields  obtained  each 
year  with  different  distances,  on  land  heavily  fertilized: 

Yield  in  pounds  per  acre  of  seed  cotton  from  planting  at  different  distances. 


Tear. 


1891 

1892 

1893 

1894 

1895 

Average  of  5  years 


1  by  4  feet. 


l^ounds. 
1,943 
1,616 
1,903 
2,065 
2,270 

1,960 


2  by  4  feet.  ■  3  by  4  feet. 

I 


Pounds. 
2,  027 
1,516 
1,905 
1,812 
2,047 

1,861 


Powids. 
2,007 
1,501 
1,925 
1,843 
1,985 

1,852 


4  by  4  feet. 


Pounds. 
1,833 
1,439 
1,770 
1,671 
1,767 


1,696 


The  figures  giving  the  average  yield  for  five  years  indicate  that  even 
on  land  so  rich  or  well  fertilized  as  to  produce  1^  bales  of  cotton  per 
acre,  a  distance  of  4  feet  in  the  row  between  plants  reduces  the  yield 
considerably.  On  the  whole  the  results  seem  to  indicate  that  with 
4-foot  rows,  when  the  date  of  planting  is  rather  late,  there  is  an  advan- 

1  Alabama  Canebrake  Sta.  Bui.  4;  Alabama  Dept.  of  Agr.  Bui.  6  (1886);  Alabama 
College  Sta.  Bui.  4  (1887),  Bui.  3  (1888);  Arkansas  Sta.  Rpt.  1888,  p.  117;  Georgia 
Sta.  Buls.  11  and  16;  Mississippi  Sta.  Rpt.  1889,  p.  13,  Rpt.  1890,  p.  16;  South  Caro- 
lina Sta.  Rpt.  1889,  p.  84. 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON. 


273 


tage  in  spacing  cotton  plants  12  to  16  inches  rather  than  in  allowing 
more  room  in  the  drill. 

The  experimenter,  however,  in  summing  up  the  results  for  the  five 
years,  expresses  a  preference  for  a  distance  of  2  by  4  feet  when  early 
planting  is  practicable  and  when  a  yield  of  1,800  to  2,000  pounds  of 
seed  cotton  can  be  expected.  In  this  case  early  thinning  and  rapid  and 
thorough  cultivation  are  recommended. 

That  close  planting  favors  early  maturity,  and  hence  is  desirable 
when  the  date  of  planting  is  late  or  where  the  growing  season  is  short, 
as  in  the  northern  part  of  the  cotton  belt,  is  indicated  by  the  following 
facts  noted  in  the  experiment  of  1892 :  The  total  yield  varied  little  for 
plantings  at  different  distances,  but  at  the  first  picking  the  yields  for 
distances  of  1,  2,  3,  and  4  feet  were  593,  449,  323,  and  221  pounds, 
respectively.  At  the  second  picking  the  yield  was  again  greatest  with 
close  planting.  However,  at  the  third  picking  the  yield  was  greater  as 
the  distance  was  greater,  and  this  was  yet  more  strikingly  true  at 
the  fourth  picking,  showing  the  tendency  of  wide  spacing  to  delay 
maturity. 

The  yield  of  seed  cotton  per  plant  as  influenced  by  distance  in  the 
drill  was  determined  in  the  same  experiments,  as  follows: 


Yield  of  seed  cotton  per  plant  at  different  distances  in  rows  4  feet  apart. 


Tear. 

1  foot. 

2  feet. 

•    3  feet. 

4  feet. 

1801 

Pound. 
0.210 
.169 
.275 
.243 
.275 

Pound. 
0. 405 
.287 
.417 
.325 
.411 

Pound. 
0.565 
.423 
.561 
.483 
.557 

Pound. 
0.687 

1892 

.542 

1893 

.690 

1894 

.566 

1895 

.665 

.234 

.309 

.518 

.626 

From  this  table  we  see  that  with  plants  at  a  little  more  than  12  inches 
apart  each  plant  averaged  more  than  one-fifth  pound  of  seed  cotton; 
at  2  feet  apart,  a  little  more  than  one-third  pound;  at  3  feet  apart, one- 
half  pound;  aud  at  4  feet,  five-eighths  pound.  The  yield  per  plant 
varied  greatly  in  different  years.  In  this  connection  it  should  be 
remembered  that  the  minimum  yield  in  these  experiments  was  1  bale 
per  acre. 

In  1893  the  Georgia  Station  conducted  an  experiment  to  ascertain 
the  best  distance  between  the  rows.  Each  plant  was  allowed  G  square 
feet  of  ground,  one  series  of  plats  bearing  plants  at  distances  of  3  feet 
by  24  inches,  another  4  feet  by  18  inches,  another  5  feet  by  14.4  inches, 
and  another  6  feet  by  12  inches.  The  yield  was  greatest — 1,964  pounds 
of  seed  cotton  x>er  acre — when  the  distance  was  3  feet  by  24  inches,  and 
the  yield  per  acre  and  the  product  per  plant  decreased  as  the  rows 
were  widened,  with  the  accompanying  closer  planting  in  the  drill.  In 
other  words,  the  yield  increased  as  the  space  assigned  to  each  plant 
1993— No.  33 18 


274  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

approached  a  perfect  square.  A  repetition  of  this  test  in  1895  con- 
firmed the  results  of  1893.  "  On  land  of  less  capacity  than  1  bale 
per  acre  it  would  probably  be  well  to  reduce  the  width  of  rows  to  3£  or 
even  3  feet.  It  may  be  safely  urged  that  land  which  will  not  produce 
the  maximum  crop  of  which  it  is  capable  with  rows  not  less  than  3  feet 
wide  can  not  profitably  be  cultivated  in  cotton."1 

In  a  test  made  by  the  University  of  Georgia,  at  Athens,  the  yield 
decreased  very  slightly  and  very  gradually  as  the  rows  widened  from 
2J  to  4  feet,  the  difference  being  scarcely  sufficient  to  pay  for  the  extra 
expense  of  cultivating  narrow  rows.  In  this  experiment  the  plants 
stood  close  together  in  the  row — 10  to  15  inches  apart — and  the  yield 
averaged  a  little  more  than  half  a  bale  per  acre.  On  the  same  field 
single  stalks  and  groups  of  2  and  3  plants  were  left  in  a  place,  the 
interval  for  all  being  the  same — 10  to  15  inches.  The  yields  were  prac- 
tically identical.2  Other  experiments,  notably  those  conducted  at  the 
North  Louisiana  Station,  suggest  that  the  cotton  plant,  under  some 
conditions,  does  not  surfer  from  the  presence  of  2  stalks  in  a  place,  a 
point  of  advantage  where  planting  in  checks  is  desirable. 

At  the  North  Louisiana  Station  it  was  found  in  1888  that  with  close 
planting  in  the  drill  every  increase  in  the  width  of  the  row  beyond  4 
feet  reduced  the  yield.  As  between  narrower  rows  the  results  were  not 
conclusive.3 

In  1889  single  stalks  were  left  8,  12, 16,  and  20  inches  apart  in  the 
drill;  2  stalks  in  a  place  were  also  left  at  these  distances  and  at  24 
inches  apart.  The  maximum  yield  of  seed  cotton  was  1£  bales  per 
acre.  Whenever  the  distance  was  greater  than  16  inches,  the  yield 
decreased  whether  1  or  2  plants  stood  in  a  place.  Even  closer  plant- 
ing seemed  to  be  slightly  advantageous.4  The  above-mentioned  experi- 
ment was  repeated  in  the  following  year,  when  the  maximum  yield 
of  seed  cotton — 1,690  pounds — was  obtained  on  the  rows  in  which  2 
plants  stood  together  at  intervals  of  16  inches.  For  distances  greater 
than  16  inches  the  yield  decreased  as  in  the  precediug  year,  both  for  1 
and  2  stalks  in  a  place.  With  single  stalks  the  yields  at  8, 12,  and  16 
inches  were  practically  identical.  Planting  at  a  distance  of  16  inches 
has  the  advantage  of  rendering  cultivation  easier  than  closer  planting.5 
When  again  repeated  in  1891  the  maximum  yield — 1,800  pounds  of  seed 
cotton  per  acre — was  obtained  on  the  2  plats  having  2  stalks  in  a  place  at 
intervals  of  both  16  and  24  inches.  For  single  stalks  distances  of  16  and 
20  inches  proved  of  equal  value,  and  yielded  more  than  closer  plant" 
ing.6  The  next  year  the  maximum  yield — 960  pounds  of  seed  cotton  per 
acre — was  obtained  from  2  stalks  in  a  place  at  intervals  of  24  inches. 


1  Georgia  Sta.  Buls.  11,  lfi,  20,  24,  and  27. 
2Proc.  Georgia  State  Agl.  Soc,  Feb. ,1874,  p.  67. 
3  Louisiana  Stas.  Bui.  22  (old  ser.). 
••Louisiana  Stas.  Bui.  27  (old  ser.). 
5 Louisiana  Stas.  Bui.  8  (2d  ser.). 
6 Louisiana  Stas.  Bui.  16  (2d  ser.). 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON.  275 

Single  stalks  were  most  productive  at  distances  of  1G  and  20  inches, 
yielding,  respectively,  010  and  020  pounds  of  seed  cotton.1  In  1803  the 
greatest  yield — 1,160  pounds  of  seed  cotton  per  acre — was  produced  by 
2  stalks  together  at  a  distance  of  24  inches.  Single  stalks  at  intervals 
of  12  inches  gave  a  yield  almost  identical  with  the  above — 1,140  pounds 
per  acre.2 

In  1802  early  maturity  was  apparently  favored  by  rather  close  plant- 
ing; at  the  first  picking  the  single  stalks  or  groups  of  two  growing  at 
intervals  of  12  inches  had  matured  a  larger  proportion  of  their  total 
crop  than  had  the  plants  grown  at  any  other  distance.  In  1803,  how- 
ever, close  planting  did  not  notably  increase  the  proportion  of  total 
yield  secured  at  the  first  picking. 

In  1803  at  the  experiment  station  at  Baton  Rouge,  La.,  1  and  2 
stalks  were  left  at  intervals  of  12,  18,  and  24  inches  in  rows  3,  4,  and  5 
feet  apart.  In  rows  3  feet  and  4  feet  apart,  a  distance  of  18  inches 
between  single  plants  afforded  the  largest  yield;  in  rows  5  feet  apart, 
12  inches  between  plants  in  the  drill  proved  best.  The  greatest  yield 
for  single  stalks,  2,037  pounds  of  seed  cotton  per  acre,  was  obtained 
when  the  distance  was  18  inches  by  3  feet;  in  other  words,  when  the 
feeding  area  of  each  plant  approached  nearest  a  square.  When  2 
stalks  were  left  in  a  place  the  greatest  yield  on  any  plat  was  obtained 
by  planting  at  distances  of  2  by  3  feet;  in  4-foot  rows,  18  inches  gave 
the  largest  yield,  1,734  pounds;  in  5-foot  rows  the  yield  increased  with 
the  distance  between  the  groups  of  plants. 

Taking  the  average  results  of  all  distances  with  both  1  and  2  stalks 
in  a  place,  the  yield  of  seed  cotton  per  acre  was  1,821  pounds  on  the 
3-foot  rows,  1,557  pounds  on  the  4-foot  rows,  and  1,540  pounds  on  the 
5-foot  rows.  With  single  stalks  3-foot  rows  and  4-foot  rows  afforded 
practically  identical  yields  when  the  distance  between  plants  was  1  foot; 
at  greater  distances  in  the  drill  3-foot  rows  proved  superior.  With  2 
stalks  in  a  place  4-foot  rows  proved  most  productive  except  when  the 
distance  in  the  drill  was  extended  to  2  feet,  when  3-foot  rows  gave  the 
largest  yield  obtained  on  any  plat.  In  this  experiment  distance  of 
planting  did  not  notably  affect  the  earliuess  of  the  crop.3 

The  South  Carolina  Station  conducted  experiments  on  the  subject 
extending  over  several  years  at  three  different  localities  in  the  State. 
The  average  results  showed  only  very  slight  differences  in  yield, 
whether  the  rows  were  3  J,  4,  or  4i  feet  apart. 

In  the  South  Carolina  tests  when  checking  was  practiced  there  were 
no  constant  differences  in  yield,  whether  the  distance  was  2i  or  4  feet 
between  the  hills.  In  comparing  drill  culture  with  checking  the  aver- 
age results  of  a  number  of  experiments  were  quite  similar,  indicating 
no  marked  differences  in  yield  between  the  two  systems.4    At  the  North 

1  Louisiana  Stas.  Bui.  22  (2d  ser.). 

2  Louisiana  Stas.  Bui.  29  (2d  ser.). 

3  Louisiana  Stas.  Bui.  28  (2d  ser.). 

4  South  Carolina  Sta.  Rpt.  1888,  p.  274;  Rpt.  1889,  p.  324;  Bui.  2  (n.  ser.) ;  see  also 
Georgia  Sta.  Bui.  11. 


276  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

Carolina  Station,  in  1886,  checks  2  feet  by  3  feet  and  3  feet  by  3  feet 
afforded  practically  the  same  yields — nearly  1£  bales  per  acre — but 
planting  at  distances  of  4  feet  by  4  feet  greatly  reduced  the  yield.  At 
distances  of  2  by  3  feet  the  crop  matured  somewhat  earlier  than  on 
plats  where  more  space  was  allowed  each  plant.1 

At  the  Alabama  College  Station  cotton  was  planted  in  188G  at  inter- 
vals of  1,  2,  3,  and  4  feet,  in  4-foot  rows.  The  closest  planting  yielded 
slightly  more,  the  widest  spacing  somewhat  less,  than  did  the  inter- 
mediate distances.  The  yields  at  different  distances  ranged  between 
1,085  and  1,292.5  pounds  of  seed  cotton  per  acre.2 

Distance  experiments  were  also  made  in  1889  and  in  1890  without 
decisive  result,  the  figures  in  the  latter  year  suggesting  a  slight  supe- 
riority of  a  distance  of  2  by  4  feet  as  against  1  by  4  feet,  3  by  4  feet, 
and  4  by  4  feet,  the  yield  being  at  the  rate  of  about  two-thirds  of  a 
bale  per  acre.     Close  planting  hastened  maturity.3 

In  1891  Welborn  Pet,  a  cluster  variety,  planted  in  rows  4  feet  apart, 
yielded  2,519  pounds  per  acre  of  seed  cotton  when  the  interval  between 
plants  was  1  foot,  2,010  pounds  when  the  plants  were  2  feet  apart,  2,077 
pounds  at  3  feet,  and  only  1,145  when  the  distance  was  increased  to  4 
feet. 

Peeler,  a  long-limbed  variety,  in  4-foot  rows  yielded  at  2  feet  1 ,983 
pounds,  at  3  feet  1,487  pounds,  at  4  feet  1,453  pounds,  and  at  5  feet 
1,333  pounds  of  seed  cotton  per  acre.4 

At  the  Alabama  Canebrake  Station,  on  slough  bottom  land,  a  dis- 
tance of  3  by  4  feet  resulted  in  a  yield  of  952  pounds  of  seed  cotton  per 
acre,  against  a  crop  of  896  pounds  obtained  on  the  plats  where  the 
spacing  was  1  by  4  feet,  2  by  4  feet,  and  4  by  4  feet.5 

At  the  same  station  in  the  following  year  the  yield  per  acre  of  seed 
cotton  in  4-foot  rows  was  as  follows  :  Plants  1  foot  apart,  1,216  pounds; 
2  feet,  936  pounds;  3  feet,  760  pounds;  4  feet,  880  pounds.6 

Prom  the  results  just  summarized  it  appears  that  there  has  been 
found  no  definite  law  determining  the  proper  distance  applicable  to  all 
conditions.  The  results  thus  far  attained  by  the  stations  relative  to 
distance  between  cotton  plants,  though  not  capable  of  generalization, 
afford  useful  hints  to  cotton  growers  whose  soils  resemble  those  of  the 
different  experiment  stations.  Future  investigations  may  result  in 
rules  of  practice  applicable  to  certain  characters  of  soil  and  varieties 
of  cotton.  At  best,  however,  variations  in  weather,  which  can  not  be 
foreseen,  will  limit  the  application  of  such  rules. 

Rotation  experiments  have  for  some  years  been  in  progress  at  the 
Arkansas   and   Louisiana    stations,  but  in   the  nature    of  the  case 

1  North  Carolina  Sta.  Ept.  1887,  p.  127. 

2  Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  4  (1887). 

3  Alabama  College  Sta.  Buls.  4  and  22. 

4  Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  33. 

5  Alabama  Canebrake  Sta.  Bui.  3. 

6  Alabama  Canebrake  Sta.  Bui.  4. 


CULTURE    OF    COTTON.  277 

conclusive  results  are  not  to  be  expected  until  many  crops  have  been 
grown.1 

Five  hundred  bolls  of  the  Peerless  variety  were  selected  at  the  Arkan- 
sas Station,  from  the  bottom  and  from  tbe  top  of  well-developed  stalks, 
the  seed  cotton  from  500  bottom  bolls  weighing  8.20  pounds,  from  500  top 
bolls  G.4G  pounds.  On  planting  the  seed  of  these  two  lots  of  cotton,  tbe 
seeds  from  bottom  bolls  germinated  much  better  and  more  promptly  than 
those  from  top  bolls.  The  former  also  matured  earlier  and  afforded  a 
larger  yield — 1,043  pounds  of  seed  cotton  per  acre,  as  against  700  pounds 
from  seed  obtained  from  top  bolls.  The  more  complete  and  earlier 
sprouting  of  the  seed  from  bottom  bolls  may  have  been  the  cause  of  the 
earlier  maturity  and  greater  productiveness  of  tbe  resulting  plants, 
for  two  replantings  of  seed  from  top  bolls  were  necessary,  and  even 
then  only  about  half  a  stand  was  obtained,  while  seed  from  bottom 
bolls  afforded  an  excellent  stand  without  replanting.  But  it  does  not 
appear  whether  the  position  on  the  parent  plant,  the  greater  size  of 
bottom  boll  seed,  or  some  other  condition  was  the  cause  of  the  earlier 
and  more  complete  germination  of  the  seed  from  bottom  bolls.  Further 
experiments  are  needed  to  fully  establish  the  difference,  if  any,  in  the 
germination  and  productiveness  of  seed  from  different  parts  of  the  cot- 
ton plant.2 

Experiments  intended  to  ascertain  the  effect  of  topping  cotton  have 
been  conducted  by  the  Alabama  Canebrake,  Alabama  College,  Georgia, 
Louisiana,  Mississippi,  and  South  Carolina  stations,  and  by  the  Univer- 
sity of  Georgia.  In  only  one  of  these  experiments,  that  of  the  Ala- 
bama Canebrake  Station,  were  the  results  decisively  in  favor  of  topping. 
In  one  year  of  the  test  at  the  Alabama  College  Station  the  figures 
slightly  favored  topping,  though  in  the  preceding  year  the  slight 
advantage  was  with  the  plants  not  topped.  The  Georgia  Station,  in 
1890  and  1891,  obtained  a  smaller  yield  from  topped  plants  than  from 
those  not  topped.  Here,  as  in  several  other  experiments  bearing  on 
this  question,  the  effect  of  topping  at  different  dates  was  studied,  and 
the  single  exception  to  the  injurious  influence  of  this  mutilation  occurred 
in  1891  on  the  plat  where  it  took  place  late,  August  15.  The  earliei 
the  topping  the  greater  was  the  injury  in  these  experiments.  At  the 
Mississippi  Station  topping  as  late  as  September  20  resulted  in  a  large 
shrinkage  in  yield. 

The  South  Carolina  Station  conducted  experiments  in  two  localities 
in  that  State  during  three  years  without  being  able  to  observe  any 
perceptible  variation  in  yield  between  plants  topped  and  those  not 
topped. 

A  single  test  at  the  iSorth  Louisiana  Station,  in  which  plants  grow- 
ing at  different  distances  were  topped,  revealed  no  marked  effect  for 
good  or  ill  resulting  from  this  practice. 

'Arkansas  Sta.  Bui.  23;  Louisiana  Bui.  17  (n.  ser.). 
2  Arkansas  Sta.  Bui.  23. 


278  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Topping  lias  given  contradictory  results  under  different  conditions. 
Differences  in  soil  and  climate  are  probably  responsible  for  this,  and  it 
remains  for  future  experiments  to  determine  the  conditions  under  which 
topping  is  beneficial  or  otherwise. 

In  a  single  test  made  by  the  University  of  Georgia  the  yield  on  the 
plats  where  topping  was  practiced  was  1,303  pounds  of  seed  cotton  and 
on  the  untreated  area  1,387  pounds;  the  loss  of  84  pounds  was 
ascribed  to  topping.  The  prominent  feature  of  this  experiment  was 
the  probable  influence  of  topping  in  hastening  maturity,  the  topped 
plants  yielding  47  per  cent  more  at  the  first  picking  than  did  the 
plants  not  topped.  This  increased  earliness,  if  it  could  be  fully  estab- 
lished, might  explain  the  occasional  success  of  topping,  and  would  rec- 
ommend the  practice  for  late  varieties  and  for  localities  where  the 
growing  season  is  short.  However,  two  experiments  on  a  more  exten- 
sive scale  at  the  Georgia  Station  fail  to  show  any  perceptible  increase 
in  earliness  as  the  result  of  topping.  In  future  experiments  in  topping 
cotton  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  its  possible  influence  on  early  maturity  of 
the  plant  will  be  observed.  The  detailed  results  of  experiments  in  top- 
ping cotton  may  be  found  in  the  following  publications: 

Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  4  (1887),  Bui.  4  (1888) ;  Alabama  Canebrake  Sta.  Bui.  4; 
Proc.  Georgia  State  Agl.  Soc.  Feb.,  1874,  p.  67;  Georgia  Sta.  Buls.  11  and  16;  Loui- 
siana Stas.  Bui.  27  (old  ser.) ;  Mississippi  Sta.  Rpt.  1889,  p.  13;  Soutb  Carolina  Exptl. 
Farm  Rpt.  1883-1886,  p.  33;  South  Caroliua  Sta.  Rpts.  1888,  p.  281,  1889,  p.  332,  and 
Bui.  2  (n.  ser.). 


DISEASES  OF  COTTON. 

By  George  F.  Atkinson,  M.  S., 
Professor  of  Botany  in  Cornell  University. 

GENERAL   NATURE    OF    COTTON   DISEASES. 

Investigations,  continued  for  several  years,  have  brought  to  light  sev- 
eral quite  well  characterized  maladies  of  the  cotton  plant  in  the  United 
States.  Some  of  these  are  physiological  in  their  nature,  being  due  to 
disturbances  of  nutrition  and  assimilation. 

Other  diseases  of  this  plant  are  due  to  the  action  of  fungus  organ- 
isms, which  live  as  parasites  in  various  parts  of  the  plant,  consuming 
the  nutriment  and  causing  destructive  changes,  which  bring  about  the 
death  of  the  part  attacked  if  not  of  the  entire  plant.  The  term  "  rust," 
frequently  defined  as  "  red  rust"  or  "black  rust,"  has  become  so  general 
in  its  application  as  to  be  utterly  valueless  other  than  in  conveying  the 
notion  of  disease.  If  we  accept  the  term  "  cotton  rust"  as  simply  syn- 
onymous with  cotton  disease,  it  will  tend  to  eliminate  much  of  the  con- 
fusion which  must  necessarily  result  should  the  term  be  accepted  for 
any  single  disease,  and  the  great  indefiniteness  which  has  clustered 
around  this  term  as  a  name  for  a  single  disease  will  be  cleared  away. 
By  the  application  of  appropriate  names  to  carefully  discriminated  con- 
ditions of  the  plant,  much  progress  will  be  made  in  the  understanding 
and  treatment  of  these  troubles. 

The  purpose  of  the  present  article  is  to  present  a  resume  of  the 
results  of  the  investigations  upon  cotton  diseases  in  the  United  States, 
some  of  which  have  already  been  published. 

These  diseases  maybe  classed  iu  three  general  divisions,  according  to 
their  etiology. 

Diseases  due  to  physiological  causes. — Mosaic  disease,  or  yellow  leaf 
blight,  red  leaf  blight,  shedding  of  bolls,  and  angular  leaf  spot. 

Fungus  diseases. — Frenching;  sore  shin,  damping  off,  or  seedling  rot; 
anthracnose;  root  rot;  cotton-leaf  blight;  areolate  mildew ;  cotton-boll 
rot;  and  ripe  decay  of  bolls. 

Nematode  diseases. — Root  galls. 

MOSAIC   DISEASE,    OR   YELLOW   LEAF    BLIGHT. 

The  later  stages  of  this  disease  probably  form  the  larger  part  of  the 
troubles  which  are  termed  "black  rust."  The  name  mosaic  disease,  or 
yellow  leaf  blight,  is  quite  characteristic  of  the  early  stages  of  the 
trouble  as  it  is  here  defined,  and  renders  it  possible  to  differentiate  it 

279 


280  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

readily  from  the  other  troubles,  which  are  often  spoken  of  as  "  black  rust," 
but  which  are  in  reality  quite  different  in  their  nature.  The  term  "yel- 
low leaf  blight"  was  first  used  by  the  author  in  1S92.1  "Mosaic  dis- 
ease" was  added  to  tliis  term,  or  used  synonymously,  a  few  months 
later.2  The  latter  seems  the  more  appropriate,  but  since  the  former 
was  first  used  in  differentiating  this  peculiar  disease  from  the  others 
it  seems  well  at  least  to  continue  its  use  in  the  literature  of  the  sub- 
ject for  the  present.  During  very  rapid  progress  of  the  disease  also 
the  mosaic  character  of  the  leaf  is  not  so  apparent  as  during  the 
normal  development. 

In  1891  a  preliminary  investigation  of  the  so-called  black  rust  was 
made.3  The  study  was  confined  entirely  to  the  organisms  present  on 
the  leaf  and  other  parts  of  the  plant,  and  it  was  not  possible  at  that 
time  to  do  more  than  to  record  the  presence  of  certain  fungus  organ- 
isms, to  observe  their  botanical  characters,  and  to  note  the  fact  that 
their  presence  at  least  hastened  the  destruction  of  the  plant. 

The  following  year  investigations  taken  up  at  the  beginning  of  the 
season  confirmed  the  view  that  the  organisms  hastened  the  destruction 
of  the  plant,  and  at  the  same  time  demonstrated  the  fact  that  the  organ- 
isms did  not  initiate  the  disease  but  only  aggravated  it. 

The  results  of  the  trials  of  Bordeaux  mixture,  eau  celeste,  and  cop- 
per sulphate  indicated  that  this  disease  could  not  be  prevented  by  the 
application  of  fungicides,  and  confirmed  the  conclusion,  drawn  from 
observations  of  a  different  character,  that  it  was  due  to  physiological 
causes. 

Experiments  conducted  under  the  direction  of  the  author  in  several 
localities  in  Alabama  during  two  seasons  showed  a  considerable  reduc- 
tion of  the  disease  on  plats  where  kainit  was  the  fertilizer  used. 

At  Auburn  an  experiment  was  conducted  on  three  plats.  Plat  No.  1, 
on  which  cowpeas  had  been  grown,  received  before  plowing  a  heavy 
dressing  of  kainit  and  acid  phosphate.  No  nitrogenous  fertilizer  was 
applied.  Plat  No.  2  received  nitrate  of  soda  in  addition  to  other  fertil- 
izers but  no  kainit.  Plat  No.  3  received  a  complete  fertilizer.  In  July 
there  was  a  perceptible  yellowing  of  the  plants  in  plat  1,  while  plats 
2  and  3  bore  a  rich  green  foliage.  The  yellow  color  of  the  plants  in 
plat  1  was  evenly  distributed  over  the  leaf,  there  being  no  indication 
of  the  mosaic  arrangement  so  characteristic  of  the  disease.  In  Septem- 
ber the  plants  were  matured  and  only  a  few  showed  any  sign  of  the 
disease.  The  yellow  color  of  the  plants  was  due  to  the  acid  phosphate 
and  kainit  ripening  the  plants  prematurely  (acid  phosphate  being 
known  to  produce  this  effect),  along  with  a  suffused  yellowing  of  the 
plants. 

Early  in  August  the  plants  in  plats  2  and  3  were  badly  affected,  the 


1  Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  36. 

-Alabama  College  Sta.  Bill.  41. 

3  Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  27;  Bot.  Gaz.;  10  (1891),  No.  3,  pp.  61-65. 


DISEASES    OF    COTTON.  281 

leaves  showing  the  checkered  appearance  of  the  disease,  and  were  an 
easy  prey  for  such  fungi  as  Macrosporium  nigricantium  and  Gercospora 
gossypina,  resulting  in  their  curling  up,  drying,  and  falling  off. 

In  a  field  of  cotton  of  3  or  4  acres  near  the  scene  of  the  above  experi- 
ment the  plants  in  May  and  June  were  very  promising,  but  in  August 
the  disease  had  appeared  to  such  an  extent  that  the  yield  fell  off  at  least 
one  half  of  what  would  have  ordinarily  been  expected.  The  fertilizer 
used  in  this  case  Avas  stable  manure,  cotton  seed,  and  acid  phosphate. 

These  experiments  seem  to  show  what  has  for  some  time  been  held 
by  a  number  of  intelligent  planters  who  have  experimented  with  kainit 
as  a  fertilizer.  It  has  been  quite  frequently  noted  that  with  quite  large 
applications  of  kainit  there  was  no  appreciable  increase  in  the  yield  of 
cotton.  This  occurs  in  those  seasons  when  the  rains  are  quite  fre- 
quent, not  long  continued,  and  keep  the  soil  moist  and  the  plant  in 
normal  growth.  On  the  other  hand,  during  dry  seasons  as  well  as  sea- 
sons of  drought  followed  by  long-continued  rains,  kainit  has  a  percepti- 
ble, sometimes  a  remarkable,  influence  in  increasing  the  yield.  This, 
with  the  well-known  effect  of  such  salts  in  changing  the  physical  con- 
dition of  the  soil,  leads  to  the  belief  that  the  increased  yield  and  the 
comparative  freedom  from  disease  result  from  the  action  of  the  kainit 
in  binding  more  firmly  together  the  soil  particles,  so  that  it  is  more 
retentive  of  moisture  or  more  able  to  draw  it  up  from  below.1  Salt  and 
wood  ashes  are  known  to  produce  much  the  same  results  in  the  soil.2 
Boiling  the  land  is  frequently  resorted  to  in  order  to  produce  the  same 
effect.  In  the  cultivation  of  cotton  the  more  progressive  planters  are 
careful  to  prepare  the  land  well  before  planting,  and  then  to  cultivate 
only  the  surface  soil  afterwards,  in  some  cases  scraping  the  surface  of 
the  soil  with  a  "sweep"  to  a  depth  of  only  a  few  inches.  This  leaves 
the  underlying  soil  undisturbed,  and  there  is  no  break  in  the  continuity 
of  the  surface  film  on  the  soil  particles  below  the  few  inches  which  have 
been  stirred.  The  few  inches  of  soil  which  have  been  stirred  thus  act 
as  a  mulch. 

Characters  of  the  disease. — In  the  normal  and  usual  progress  of  the 
disease  there  first  appears  a  peculiar  yellowing  of  the  leaf,  which  gives 
it  a  checkered  or  mosaic  appearance.  The  yellow  color  appears  in  small 
areas  and  bears  a  definite  relation  to  the  venation  of  the  leaf,  being 
bounded  by  veinlets  which  subtend  areas  more  or  less  rectangular  in 
outline.  The  green  color  is  found  along  the  larger  and  intermediate 
veins.  The  portions  of  the  mesophyll  lying  along  the  veins,  being  near 
the  channels  for  the  distribution  of  the  nutriment,  receive  a  better  sup- 
ply of  moisture  and  assimilative  material  than  the  areas  farther  away 
and  those  along  the  smaller  and  terminal  ramification  of  the  vascular 
channels  at  a  time  when  the  supply  is  being  cut  short  because  of  unfa- 
vorable conditions  of  the  soil.     They  are  thus  enabled  to  hold  the  green 

'Alabama,  College  Sta.  Bui.  36. 

2  See  article  on  climatology  and  soils,  p.  160. 


282 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


iff? 

flO"- 


color  and  continue  the  activities  of  the  leaf  for  a  longer  period,  while 
the  angular  areas  most  remote  from  the  sources  of  supply  are  the  first 
to  feel  the  loss,  and  the  deficient  nutrition  is  manifested  by  the  yellow 
color  of  the  parts. 

During  the  first  stages  of  the  disease  this  color  may  become  very  pro- 
nounced, but  later  it  may  be  marred  by  the  appearance  of  discolored 
spots  produced  by  the  growth  of  fungus  organisms  in  the  tissues,  weak- 
ened by  the  failing  nutrition  of  the  plant.  Soon,  however,  there  appear 
minute  brownish  spots  in  the  yellowish  areas,  which  increase  in  sizecen- 

trifugally,  assuming  a  cir- 
cular outline  and  marked 
by  concentric  rings.  The 
concentric  rings  are  prob- 
ably due  to  the  periodic 
growth  of  the  fungus 
threads  within  the  tis- 
sues, the  periodicity  being 
produced  by  variations  in 
the  temperature.  The 
first  fungus,  which  in  most 
cases  appears  following 
the  mosaic  condition  of 
the  leaf,  is  Macrosporium 
nigricanti um  A  t  k .  As 
the  leaf  thus  becomes  in 
a  badly  diseased  condi- 
tion, the  Macrosporium  is 
likely  to  be  soon  followed 
by  an  Alternaria.1  The 
black  hyphse  and  spores 
of  these  two  fungi  soon 
give  a  black  appearance 
to  nearly  the  entire  leaf, 
from  which  the  disease 
takes  the  name  of  "black 
rust."  These  are  not, 
however,  the  only  fungi  which  are  found  as  accompaniments  of  the 
later  stages  of  the  disease.  Colletotrichum  gossypii  Southworth  is 
sometimes  found,  and  Cercospora  gossypina  Cooke,  as  well  as  its  per- 
fect stage,  Sphcerella  gossypina  Atkinson,  is  a  very  common  accom- 
paniment of  the  trouble.  The  accompaniment  of  the  Cercospora 
stage  of  Sphcerella  gossypina  frequently  produces  a  separate  type  of 
the   disease,   especially  when   this   fungus   is   more    abundant  than 

1Thia  may  be  Alternaria  tenuis  Nees,  which  Gasparrini  found  with  other  molds  as 
an  accompaniment  of  the  disease  of  cotton  in  Italy  known  as  Pelagra.  (See  Gaspar- 
rini, Osservationi  sopra  una  malattia  del  cotone,  etc.  Inst.  D'Incoraggiameuto. 
Napoli,  1865.) 


X 


Fig.  4.— Mosaic  disease,  or  yenow  leaf  blight — Macrosporium 
form. 


DISEASES    OF    COTTON.  283 

either  the  Macrosporium  or  Alternaria.  This  usually  occurs  when 
the  disease  progresses  quite  rapidly  through  the  earlier  stages,  so 
that  the  yellow  color  is  soou  diffused  somewhat  evenly  over  the 
entire  leaf  or  a  large  part  of  it. 

The  Colletotrichum  gossypii  Southworth  will  be  described  under  the 
paragraph  on  anthracnose  of  cotton,  and  the  Sphcerella  gossypina  under 
the  paragraph  on  cotton-leaf  blight.  Brief  descriptions  of  the  others 
may  be  given  here. 

Macrosporium  nigricantium  Atkinson. 

The  technical  description  is  as  follows : 1 

Hyphse  amphigenous,  subfasciculate,  or  scattered,  0.050-0.140  mm.  by  0.006-0.007 
mm.;  nodulose,  septate,  olive  brown.  Conidia  0.018-0.022  mm.  by  0.036-8.050  mm., 
strongly  constricted  about  the  middle,  stoutly  rostrate  at  one  side  of  the  apes, 
smooth,  transversely,  longitudinally,  and  obliquely  septate,  olive  brown. 

From  the  intercellular  mycelium  in  the  leaf  the  hyphse  emerge  to  the 
outside,  and,  projecting  a  short  distance  from  the  surface,  bear  the  spores 
at  their  free  ends.  When  a  spore  is  being  produced,  the  hypha  becomes 
somewhat  enlarged  directly  below  it.  When  the  spore  falls  away,  the 
hypha  elongates  at  the  end,  the  new  growth  arising  from  the  inside  of 
the  enlargement,  its  contour  being  the  same  size  as  that  of  the  hypha 
just  below  the  enlargement.  When  the  new  growth  first  appears,  it 
seems  not  to  be  connected  with  the  enlargement,  but  projecting  through 
it.  As  the  hypha  ages  this  appearance  usually  is  not  present  and  the 
enlargement  seems  to  taper  above  into  the  new  growth.  The  new 
growth  thus  formed  at  the  end  of  a  hypha  may  bear  another  spore,  and 
so  in  favorable  weather  from  two  to  eight  or  more  spores  may  be  borne 
in  succession  from  a  single  hypha,  the  points  where  the  successive 
spores  were  borne  being  just  at  the  upper  end  of  the  successive  enlarge- 
ments. At  the  enlargements  there  is  usually  a  darker  band  around 
the  center.  The  hyphae  thus  have  a  nodulose  appearance  in  such  spe- 
cies as  Macrosporium  parasiticum  Thiim.  As  the  young  spore  develops 
it  is  constricted  in  the  middle  before  the  first  transverse  partition  is 
formed. 

The  species  of  Alternaria  has  not  been  determined.  The  hyphse  are 
scattered  or  loosely  fasciculate,  and  plain,  not  nodulose,  and  by  this 
character  alone  may  be  differentiated  from  the  Macrosporium.  The 
conidia  are  obclavate  and  borne  in  chains.  In  making  microscopic 
preparations  from  the  fungus  on  the  leaf  it  is  difficult  to  find  the 
conidia  in  this  relation,  since  they  so  easily  become  separated,  but 
by  making  water  cultures  on  a  glass  slip  this  manner  of  development 
is  readily  demonstrated. 

Other  saprogenous  fungi  frequently  appear  in  the  final  stages  of  the 
disease,  but  there  is  no  especial  interest  or  importance  in  discussing 
them. 

1  Bot.  Gaz.,  16  (1891),  No.  3,  pp.  61-65. 


284  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

If  dry  weather  continues  for  a  long  period  and  the  disease  is  devel- 
oped, it  is  not  an  infrequent  occurrence  for  the  processes  of  dissolution 
in  the  leaf  to  continue  so  that  the  leaves  curl  up  and  fall  away,  and  the 
plant  may  even  die  without  the  appearance  of  any  of  the  organisms 
above  described,  or  only  a  small  percentage  of  the  growth  which  is 
sure  to  appear  if  warm  rains  follow  a  drought  when  the  disease  is 
present. 

RED  LEAF   BLIGHT. 

The  foliage  of  cotton  frequently  presents  a  red  coloration,  which  is  of 
the  same  nature  as  that  displayed  in  what  are  termed  "  autumn  leaves." 
It  is  an  exceedingly  common  occurrence  toward  the  maturity  of  the 
cotton,  even  of  quite  healthy  and  rank  growth.  It  is  of  rarer  occur- 
rence, however,  in  alluvial  and  rich  soils  than  on  poor  lands.  It  is 
especially  common  on  what  is  known  as  the  "  upland,"  where  the  soil  is 
worn  and  poor.  Here  it  occurs  quite  early  in  the  season,  and  cotton  some- 
times makes  but  little  progress  before  the  leaves  become  red,  growth 
ceases,  an  early  maturity  sets  in,  and  the  leaves  drop,  while  the  plant 
bears  from  one  to  two  or  several  bolls.  The  affection,  if  it  can  be  so 
called,  is  usually  denominated  "red  rust."  It  results  from  an  impov- 
erished condition  of  the  soil,  showing  a  lack  especially  of  potash  and 
nitrogen,  and  probably  also  of  phosphoric  acid.  This  can  be  remedied 
by  proper  fertilizing  and  cultivation. 

A  species  of  mite,  probably  Tctranychus  telarius  or  a  closely  re- 
lated species,  frequently  produces  an  injury  to  the  leaves  of  cotton 
which  causes  them  to  redden.  At  the  same  time  the  under  surface  of 
the  leaves,  where  the  mites  effect  the  direct  injury,  is  made  to  appear 
"rusty"  or  "scurvy,"  and,  with  the  coloration  of  the  leaves,  would 
naturally  lead  to  the  designation  of  this  trouble  also  as  "  red  rust." 
It  occurs  in  several  of  the  cotton -producing  States,  especially  North 
and  South  Carolina,  where  it  has  been  known  to  do  considerable  injury. 
At  one  time,  before  the  careful  tests  with  certain  fertilizers  were  made 
and  before  a  careful  study  of  the  physiological  relations  of  the  plant  to 
certain  physical  and  worn-out  conditions  of  the  soil,  the  author  was 
inclined  to  believe  that  this  mite  was  perhaps  the  sole  cause  of  the 
so-called  "red  rust."  That  it  does  sometimes  cause  serious  injury 
which  should  not  in  any  way  be  confounded  with  the  red  leaf  blight  is 
certain.  Some  planters  believe  that  this  phase  of  the  disease,  though 
they  do  not  distinguish  it  from  the  red  leaf  blight,  is  more  apt  to  occur 
near  barns  or  buildings  where  there  are  numerous  weeds,  while  others 
believe  that  it  is  certain  to  occur  where  the  cotton  is  planted  adjacent 
to  a  clover  field,  and  still  others  say  that  if  an  armful  of  clover  be  car- 
ried across  a  cotton  field  the  disease  will  soon  appear  all  along  that 
tract.  This  would  favor  the  possibility  that  the  mites  in  these  cases 
were  on  the  clover,  and  it  is  known  that  in  some  cases  they  are  quite 
common  on  this  plant  as  well  as  others. 


DISEASES    OF    COTTON.  285 

Literature. — "The  cotton  worm  and  other  enemies  of  the  cotton  plant,"  G.  F. 
Atkinson,  South  Carolina  Dept.  Agr.  Monthly  Kpt.,  Oct.,  1888,  p.  91.  South  Caro- 
lina Sta.  Bui.  4  (n.  ser.),  p.  60.     Alabama  College  Sta.  Buls.  36  and  41. 

SHEDDING   OF  BOLLS.1 

The  shedding  of  bolls  or  "forms,"  or  their  death  and  drying  while 
still  attached  to  the  plant,  is  very  frequently  a  source  of  great  loss  to 
the  cotton  crop.  The  trouble  has  been  long  known,  but  one  widely 
prevalent  and  disastrous  form  has  been  misunderstood.  It  is  often 
confused  with  the  work  of  the  bollworm,  with  punctures  made  by  some 
hemipterous  insect,  etc.  That  some  of  the  shedding  is  due  to  the  work 
of  the  bollworm  is  true,  but  the  shedding  referred  to  here  is  a  purely 
physiological  trouble. 

During  three  years'  observation  in  Alabama  the  author  found  this 
physiological  form  of  shedding  to  be  very  serious.  It  occurs  most  fre- 
quently in  extremes  of  either  dry  or  wet  weather,  or  during  the  change 
from  one  extreme  to  another.  It  may  occur  to  some  extent  under  nor- 
mal climatic  conditions,  especially  if  the  cotton  plants  are  too  thick,  or 
the  variety  of  cotton  is  one  which  develops  a  very  large  amount  of  fruit 
forms  in  proportion  to  the  leaf  surface. 

During  a  normal  period  of  growth  the  plants  put  out  as  many  fruit 
forms  as  could  be  matured  should  the  conditions  favorable  to  growth 
continue.  If  a  very  dry  period  succeeds  this,  interfering  with  the  sup- 
ply of  nutriment  and  moisture,  there  will  occur  a  partial  withholding  of 
tissue-forming  material  and  moisture  at  a  very  critical  period  in  the  life 
of  the  young  "  forms,"  and  the  tissues  of  the  young  fruit  are  forced  into 
an  unnaturally  matured  condition.  The  fruit,  including  the  peduncle 
and  often  more  or  less  of  the  surface  tissue  of  the  stem  at  its  point 
of  attachment,  becomes  first  of  a  paler  green  color  than  the  adjacent 
parts  of  the  plant,  so  that  a  well-marked  color  line  delimits  the  healthy 
from  the  unhealthy  portion.  In  many  cases  the  tissue  is  separated  at 
this  line,  so  that  the  fruit  falls  off  completely  or  hangs  by  a  few  fibers 
to  the  stem.  The  early  growing  season  may  be  exceptionally  favorable 
for  the  development  of  a  large  plant  with  an  abundance  of  young  fruit, 
and  if  followed  by  even  ordinarily  normal  conditions  will  result  in  a 
j)artial  loss  of  this  fruit.  A  long  rainy  season  may  also  cause  the 
young  bolls  or  forms  to  fall,  the  soil  being  so  saturated  with  water  as 
to  interfere  with  root  absorption,  and  the  assimilative  activity  of  the 
leaves  will  also  be  disturbed. 

The  more  or  less  complete  separation  of  the  tissues  at  the  line  of 
division  between  the  healthy  and  dying  portion  depends  upon  the  point 
of  attachment  of  the  fruit  to  the  stem,  and  also  to  some  extent  upon 
the  variety.  In  some  cases  the  line  of  separation  is  apt  to  be  clean  cut, 
resembling  the  scar  left  by  a  falling  leaf,  especially  when  the  peduncle 
stands  at  a  strong  angle  from  the  supporting  branch  near  its  junction 

'Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui. 41. 


286  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

with  the  stem  or  larger  branch.  If  the  point  of  attachment  is  at  a 
somewhat  greater  distance  from  this  junction  and  the  peduncle  much 
more  inclined  obliquely,  the  line  of  separation  is  apt  to  include  from 
one-half  to  1  inch  of  the  surface  tissue  of  the  stem  below  the  pedun- 
cle, and  very  frequently  then  the  lower  part  of  the  dead  surface  tissue 
does  not  entirely  separate  and  the  boll  usually  remains  clinging  to 
the  plant.  In  some  varieties,  especially  the  cluster  varieties  of  cot- 
ton, the  separation  of  the  tissues  does  not  take  place  so  frequently,  and 
the  boll  usually  remains  firmly  fixed  in  position;  but  the  dead  part 
readily  indicates  the  tissues  involved. 

The  matured  bolls  do  not  form  a  separative  layer  of  tissue  when  they 
mature,  but  remain  fixed  to  the  plant.  The  falling  away  of  the  dead 
immature  bolls  and  forms,  when  it  does  occur,  is  a  useful  provision  of 
nature,  since  the  plant  is  left  in  better  condition  for  the  gathering 
of  fruit  which  does  mature.  One  great  objection  held  by  some  to  the 
cluster  varieties  of  cotton  is  their  tendency  to  hold  the  dead  immature 
fruit.  There  is  need  of  careful  observations  on  this  disease  in  order  to 
throw  light  upon  its  treatment. 

ANGULAR  LEAF   SPOT. 

This  disease  is  named  from  the  dark  angular  spots  which  appear  in 
the  leaf.  It  is  very  widespread,  but  rarely  appears  to  such  an  extent 
as  to  attract  attention.  Careful  observation  would  probably  reveal  it 
in  every  cotton  field  during  the  growing  season  from  May  to  July,  and 
frequently  later.  The  disease  is  first  manifested  by  a  watery  .appear- 
ance in  definite  areolate  spots,  which  are  bounded  by  the  veinlets  of 
the  leaf.  The  spots  are  sometimes  very  numerous  and  frequently  con 
fluent.  Often  the  disease  follows  one  or  more  of  the  main  ribs  of  the 
leaf,  being  bounded  on  either  side  by  an  irregularly  zigzag  line.  In 
time  the  spots  become  blackish  and  then  brown,  and  are  frequently 
bordered  by  a  blackish  color  where  the  disease  has  extended  centrifu- 
gally.  The  dead  spots  in  the  leaf  sometimes  break  out,  leaving  many 
perforations  with  ragged  edges,  somewhat  as  often  results  in  "cotton 
leaf  blight."    The  disease  hastens  the  falling  of  the  leaves. 

In  the  very  earliest  appearance  of  the  spots,  when  the  watery  condi- 
tion is  coming  on,  these  spots  swarm  with  bacteria.  This  suggested 
that  it  might  be  a  bacterial  disease.  Cultures  of  the  organism  present 
were  obtained  and  inoculations  of  healthy  leaves  were  made  at  different 
times,  but  without  producing  the  disease.  It  usually  appears  only  in 
the  older  leaves  which  have  passed  their  prime.  It  is  quite  likely  that 
the  bacteria  present  may  easily  start  the  trouble  in  such  leaves,  while 
they  may  be  unable  to  affect  the  younger  and  healthy  leaves.  This 
may  account  for  the  failure  of  the  inoculations.  Sometimes,  but  rarely, 
it  attacks  all  of  the  leaves  on  a  plant.  This  suggests  that  such  plants 
may  be  constitutionally  weak  from  some  unfavorable  condition  which 
renders  them  susceptible  of  attack.     The  trouble  has  not,  however, 


DISEASES    OF    COTTON.  287 

been  sufficiently  studied.  There  sometimes  occur  on  the  same  plants 
bolls  which  present  spots  of  the  same  watery  appearance,  which  finally 
terminates  in  a  rot  and  death.  In  this  case  the  physiological  weak- 
ness of  the  plant  would  naturally  extend  to  the  boll.  A  careful 
bacteriological  study  of  the  trouble  in  connection  with  physiological 
studies  of  the  plant  as  related  to  different  conditions  of  the  soil,  ferti- 
lizers, and  meteorological  conditions  might  throw  more  light  on  the 
disease. 

Literature.— "Black  rusfc  of  cotton,"  G.  F.  Atkinson,  Bot.  Gaz.,  16  (1891),  No.  3,  p.  16; 
Alabama  College  Sta.  Buls.  27  and  41. 

FRENCHING. 

This  disease  has  been  known  for  some  time  among  planters  in  the 
middle  and  southern  part  of  Alabama.  Inquiries  among  planters  by 
the  author  regarding  the  origin  of  this  singular  name  for  the  disease 
did  not  elicit  any  information  as  to  either  the  time  when  the  name  was 
applied  or  the  meaning  of  ihe  word  in  this  connection.  Judging  from 
the  significance  of  the  verb  of  the  same  root,  which  means  something 
foreign,  and  therefore  in  a  later  sense  strange,  unnatural,  etc.,  it  is 
intended  to  denote  a  strange  or  unnatural  appearance  of  the  cotton 
plant. 

This  disease  is  probably  distributed  over  a  large  portion  of  the  South- 
ern cotton  belt.  The  author  knows  of  its  occurrence  in  the  State  of 
Alabama  at  the  following  places:  Mathews  Station,  Hope  Hull,  Allen- 
town,  Pike  Eoad,  Athens,  Selma,  and  Montgomery.  In  1892  specimens 
were  received  from  Pine  Bluff,  Ark.  The  disease  is  sometimes  con- 
fused with  what  is  more  properly  known  as  variegated  cotton,  the 
foliage  of  which  presents  quite  large  angular  areas  of  various  colors, 
as  red,  white,  and  various  shades  of  green  on  the  same  leaf,  reminding 
one  of  a  coleus  plant.  The  author  knows  of  several  planters  who  thus 
confuse  the  variegated  cotton  with  the  disease  frenching.  Pammel1 
speaks  of  the  term  "frenching"  being  applied  to  variegated  cotton  in 
Texas,  though  he  records  nothing  like  this  disease.  It  probably  occurs 
in  that  State,  however. 

The  first  sign  of  the  disease  is  usually  a  light  yellowing  of  the  lower 
leaves  at  the  edge,  or  more  commonly  between  the  forks  of  the  main 
ribs  of  the  leaf.  This  yellowing  of  the  leaf,  which  is  sometimes  nearly 
white  and  quite  pronounced,  is  the  result  of  a  failing  nutrition  of  the 
leaf,  but  the  trouble  is  more  serious  than  in  the  mosaic  disease  and  pro- 
gresses more  rapidly.  It  begins  at  the  edge  of  the  leaves  farthest  from 
the  large  veins,  and  then  progresses  rapidly  up  the  leaf  between  the 
ribs.  The  leaf  then  presents  the  yellow  color  in  a  radiate  fashion  par- 
allel with  the  larger  veins,  and  not  in  checkers,  as  in  the  mosaic  disease. 
Quite  early  in  the  disease  the  leaf  begins  to  brown  at  the  points  where 
the  yellow  first  appeared,  so  that  a  brown  color  of  the  dead  portions  of 

1  Texas  Sta.  Bui.  4. 


288  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

the  leaf  follows  quite  closely  behind  the  yellow.  In  this  way  there  are 
three  distinct  colors,  green,  yellow,  and  brown,  in  parallel  radiating 
bands.  The  brown  and  dead  parts  of  the  leaf  soon  break  out,  leaving 
the  leaf  quite  ragged.  The  green  color  lies  along  the  sides  of  the  veins. 
This  is  bordered  by  the  yellow,  and  the  brown  cuts  a  V-shaped  figure 
in  the  yellow  area,  while  the  entire  margin  or  only  a  part  of  it  may  also 
be  brown  and  dead. 

While  the  lower  leaves  are  usually  the  first  ones  to  be  attacked,  they 
do  not  go  through  all  these  changes  of  color  before  others  are  affected; 
but  the  general  progress  is  from  the  lower  leaves  to  those  higher  up  on 
the  plant.  It  is  quite  a  common  thing  to  see  quite  large  plants  with 
nearly  all  the  leaves  affected,  the  lower  ones  nearly  dead  while  the  upper 
ones  are  in  the  first  stages  of  the  disease.  When  the  leaves  are  nearly 
dead,  the  tissues  of  the  petiole  at  the  junction  of  the  branch  mature, 
form  a  separative  layer,  and  fall  away.  This  may  continue  until  all  of 
the  leaves  of  a  plant  fall  off. 

The  author's  first  observations  were  made  on  plants  about  1  foot  in 
height,  a  short  period  before  the  first  blooms  appeared,  in  1891.  In 
May,  1892,  at  Mathews  Station,  he  observed  the  disease  in  very  young 
plants,  only  a  few  days  old,  and  before  the  plumule  was  developed. 
The  peculiar  yellow  color  was  well  developed  in  the  cotyledons.  These 
plants  were  growing  in  the  "gunpowder"  soil  of  the  black  belt,  and  the 
season  being  at  that  time  a  little  dry,  the  soil  would  frequently  adhere 
in  a  hard  lump  about  the  roots  of  the  plants.  Taking  advantage  of 
this,  a  few  of  these  very  young  plants  which  showed  the  disease  in  the 
cotyledons  were  taken  up  and  transported  to  Auburn,  Ala.,  a  distance 
by  rail  of  nearly  100  miles,  where  they  were  transplanted.  The 
removal  checked  their  growth  for  a  few  days,  then  growth  set  in  and 
all  external  signs  of  the  disease  disappeared.  But  in  the  latter  part 
of  June,  when  the  plants  were  almost  1  foot  in  height,  they  were 
severely  attacked,  and  by  the  middle  of  July  all  of  the  leaves  pre- 
sented the  striped  appearance  so  peculiar  and  characteristic  of  the  dis- 
ease. The  disease  has  never  been  known,  except  in  this  case,  in  the 
region  about  Auburn. 

When  the  plant  is  old,  these  progressive  changes  in  the  color  of  the 
leaf  are  frequently  distributed  over  many  more  courses  on  the  leaf, 
following  not  only  between  the  main  four  or  five  veins,  but  also  the 
spaces  between  the  primary  branching  of  these  veins.  On  plants  pos- 
sessing a  mild  type  of  the  disease,  some  of  the  leaves  may  exhibit  the 
yellow  color  in  indefinite  courses — now  a  few  large  yellow  spots  some 
distance  from  the  edge,  or  a  pale  yellow  occupying  nearly  one  side  of 
the  leaf.  But  the  disease  is  always  sufficiently  characterized — either 
by  the  usual  relation  of  the  different  colors,  or  by  the  peculiar  shade 
of  yellow,  or  by  both — for  one  who  has  once  carefully  observed  the 
disease  to  easily  detect  it,  except  in  some  cases  described  later. 

The  sure  test  of  the  disease,  however,  is  found  by  breaking  or  cutting 


DISEASES    OP   COTTON.  289 

the  stem  of  the  plant.  If  it  is  "frenching"  the  tissues  of  the  fibro- 
vascular  system  will  appear  light  brown  in  color,  the  intensity  of  the 
color  depending  upon  the  virulence  or  stage  of  the  attack.  Planters 
say  the  heart  is  black.  A  microscopic  examination  shows  the  presence 
of  a  fungus,  the  threads  of  which  sometimes  completely  fill  some  of 
the  vascular  ducts  of  the  plant.  The  discoloration  of  the  tissues  is 
more  pronounced  in  those  ducts  in  which  the  fungus  is  located.  Under 
the  microscope  the  color  of  the  tissues  appears  to  be  a  brilliant  yellow, 
unless  quite  old,  when  it  is  much  darker  and  suffused  with  brown. 
The  threads  of  the  fungus  are  colorless  when  young,  but  become  a 
bright  yellow  in  age,  and  measure  2  to  4  /u  in  diameter.  Minute 
spores,  measuring  1  to  2  by  2  to  4  //,  are  developed  from  the  ends  of 
the  threads,  and  are  found  either  attached  to  their  points  of  origin  or 
free  within  the  ducts.  Pure  cultures  were  obtained  and  in  all  such 
cases  the  fungus  proved  to  be  a  species  of  Fusarium. 

The  fungus  enters  the  plant  near  the  surface  of  the  ground,  or  in  the 
upper  portions  of  the  roots.  As  the  threads  increase  they  grow 
upward,  and,  reaching  the  branches  and  petioles  of  the  leaves,  grow  out 
into  their  circulatory  channels.  This  explains  why  the  lower  leaves 
are  the  first  to  be  affected  during  the  early  period  of  the  disease. 

The  plants  sometimes  put  out  new  growth  after  losing  all  their 
leaves,  and  seem  to  a  certain  extent  to  recover  from  the  disease.  In 
many  cases  the  upper  part  of  the  plant  dies  and  the  new  growth  comes 
from  the  latent  buds  and  dwarfed  branches  near  the  ground. 

These  periods  of  convalescence  may  be  followed  by  relapses  several 
times  during  the  season.  The  second  attack  often  differs  greatly  from 
the  first  in  external  appearance,  probably  because  the  fungus  is  so  well 
distributed  all  through  the  plant  that  its  effect  in  attacking  the  new 
growth  and  increasing  in  the  old  is  more  rapid,  thus  not  permitting 
the  gradual  sequence  of  color  which  takes  place  as  described  above.  A 
few  leaves  sometimes  show  the  characteristic  sequence  of  color,  but  the 
leaf  wilts,  thus  checking  the  color  changes.  The  fruit  is  also  affected 
and  frequently  undergoes  decay  when  nearly  ready  to  open,  even  on 
plants  which  do  not  seem  to  be  very  badly  affected,  or  it  frequently 
happens  that  in  a  light  attack  much  of  the  fruit  comes  to  maturity  and 
opens  in  the  normal  way. 

Unless  complicated  with  some  other  disease  the  fungus  does  not 
advance  with  such  rapidity  into  the  roots.  This  probably  explains  why 
so  many  plants  sometimes  recover,  the  roots  in  favorable  weather 
supplying  constantly  the  necessary  moisture  and  nutrition  and  furnish- 
ing material  for  the  growth  of  the  latent  branches  near  the  base.  In 
sandy  land  the  disease  seems  to  progress  much  more  rapidly,  especially 
when  the  plant  has  attained  considerable  size.  It  then  often  happens 
that  very  few  of  the  leaves  show  the  gradual  color  changes  described 
above,  but  on  a  hot  or  dry  day  suddenly  wilt,  a  few  of  the  leaves  wilting 
on  one  day  and  more  on  the  following,  or  sometimes  all  on  the  same 
day,  the  plant  then  soon  dying. 
1993— No.  33 19 


290  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

This  peculiarity  of  the  disease  by  which  the  leaves  suddenly  wilt,  in 
sandy  land,  is  in  external  appearance  very  much  like  the  root  rot  of 
cotton  in  Texas,  but  the  etiology  of  the  disease  is  very  different. 

Occasionally  the  plants  on  sandy  land  are  also  affected  with  the  root 
gall  nematode.  Whenever  cotton  in  frenching  districts  is  infested  by 
these  worms,  almost  every  plant  is  also  affected  by  the  organism  of 
frenching.  This  is  probably  because  the  roots,  being  diseased  by  the 
worm,  offer  easy  access  to  the  fungus.  But  many  of  the  plants  that  are 
frenching  are  not  affected  by  the  worms,  even  in  sandy  land.  The  two 
diseases  are  quite  distinct,  but  when  both  attack  a  plant  the  trouble  is 
far  more  serious.  "  Knotty  swellings,"  such  as  are  caused  by  this  nema- 
tode, are  reported  by  some  planters  to  occur  on  the  roots  of  cotton  in 
the  soil  of  the  black  belt.  These  are  probably  caused  by  the  same 
nematode,  but  the  author  has  never  observed  them  on  the  cotton  roots 
in  the  prairie  soil,  while  he  has  many  times  seen  them  on  cotton  roots 
in  sandy  soil.  That  they  do  occur  in  the  prairie  soil  on  the  roots  of 
other  plants  is  certain,  since  they  have  been  found  on  the  roots  of 
tomatoes  and  lettuce. 

Artificial  cultures  of  the  fungus. — Besides  cultures  for  separation, 
which  showed  the  fungus  to  be  a  species  of  Fusarium,  cell  cultures 
were  made  by  using  very  thin  sections  of  the  diseased  tissue,  so  that 
the  microscope  showed  that  the  growth  obtained  originated  from  the 
fungus  threads  within  the  stem. 

In  artificial  cultures  spore  formation  takes  place  within  fifteen  or 
twenty  hours  from  the  time  of  starting  the  culture.  The  hyphas  in  arti- 
ficial cultures  usually  remained  hyaline,  only  one  case  to  the  contrary 
being  observed.  This  occurred  in  the  case  of  some  hypha}  in  a  bouillon 
culture  which  were  left  above  the  medium  when  transplanting  some  of 
the  fungus  from  the  bouillon  culture.  In  a  few  days  they  had  become 
the  same  color  as  the  hyphse  found  within  the  tissues.  In  artificial  cul- 
tures frequently  enlarged  cells  occur  as  intercalary  cells  of  the  hyphse, 
which  resemble  gernmsB.  Sometimes  they  occur  at  the  end  of  a  hypha, 
and  in  either  case  they  may  bear  several  flask-shaped  basidia. 

In  artificial  cultures  the  spores  measure  2  to  5  by  4  to  40  //,  are  con- 
tinuous or  1  to  5  septate,  colorless,  faintly  granular,  frequently  possess- 
ing one  or  more  vacuoles.  The  very  minute  spores  are  narrowly  oval, 
and  as  they  increase  in  length  become  curved.  The  shorter  ones  usu- 
ally have  one  end  rounded,  the  other  sharply  pointed.  The  longer 
ones  are  usually  pointed  at  both  ends. 

The  fertile  hyphse,  or  basidia,  as  they  are  sometimes  called,  also  vary 
greatly.  The  early  ones,  short  and  narrowly  flask  shaped,  are  sup- 
ported on  the  main  hypha  by  a  narrow  pedicel.  Later  they  frequently 
increase  in  size  and  branch  profusely.  The  formation  of  spores  in  arti- 
ficial cultures  reminds  one  of  some  species  ol  Glceosporiuni  and  Col- 
letotrichum  where  they  are  clustered  about  the  end  of  the  basidium. 
Frequently  in  this  Fusarium,  as  in  other   species  of  this  genus,  the 


DISEASES    OF    COTTON.  291 

fruiting  hypha  elongates  as  the  spores  are  being  borne  and  thus  leaves 
the  spores  distributed  along  its  course.  On  sterilized  cotton  bolls  or 
Irish  potatoes  longer  spores  were  developed  than  on  agar  or  in  bouillon. 

Parallel  cultures  were  made  of  a  saprophytic  Fusarium  which  occurs 
on  cotton  throughout  the  cotton  belt  and  is  also  frequently  found  on 
the  bolls  of  frenehing  cotton.  The  two  seem  to  be  specifically  distinct. 
In  the  saprophytic  species  the  spores  are  more  strongly  curved  and  the 
ends  very  long  and  slender.  This  distinction  was  maintained  through- 
out several  cultures.  The  name  Fusarium  vasinfectum  was  proposed  for 
this  fungus  by  the  author.1 

Inoculations. — Experiments  were  made  in  August,  1892,  to  determine 
if  the  disease  could  be  obtained  by  inoculations  with  pure  cultures  Of 
the  fungus.  The  Fusarium  was  considered  not  to  be  a  sufficiently 
aggressive  parasite  to  be  able  to  make  its  way  into  the  ducts  of  the 
circulatory  system  unaided.  The  fact  that  the  "sore  shin"  fungus 
could  disease  the  stems  of  young  cotton  plants,  and  that  many  of  the 
plants  recovered  even  after  the  ulcer  reached  the  vascular  system,  sug- 
gested that  possibly  this  fungus  might  prepare  the  way  for  the  entrance 
of  the  Fusarium. 

Several  tests  were  made  on  growing  plants  that  had  been  inoculated 
with  the  sore  shin  disease.  In  one  experiment  pure  cultures  of  the 
Fusarium  were  inserted  with  success,  one  plant  showing  the  external 
characteristics  of  the  disease,  and  the  fungus  was  found  in  the  tissues 
when  a  microscopical  examination  was  made.  In  another  experiment 
plants  affected  with  the  frenehing  disease  were  placed  in  contact  with 
some  that  were  suffering  from  sore  shin,  the  leaves  of  which  in  one  case 
passed  through  the  yellow  color  changes  and  then  wilted. 

The  ducts  of  the  stem  also  presented  all  the  characteristics  of  the 
disease.  The  result  was  more  satisfactory  than  that  obtained  from  the 
inoculations  from  the  pure  culture  of  the  Fusarium.  This  suggested 
the  possibility  that  bacteria  which  are  frequently  found  in  the  diseased 
tissues  were  the  cause  of  the  disease  rather  than  the  Fusarium.  While 
positive  assertions  in  favor  of  the  Fusarium  being  the  cause  of  the  dis- 
ease instead  of  bacteria  can  not  properly  be  made,  the  evidence  thus 
far  in  hand  gives  greater  support  to  the  former  view.  The  Fusarium 
is  invariably  found  in  both  cotton  and  okra  affected  with  the  disease. 
Bacteria  are  not  always  present  except  in  later  stages,  for  in  quite  a 
number  of  transplantings  of  diseased  tissue  to  nutrient  agar  no  bac- 
teria were  developed,  while  the  Fusarium  always  appeared.  Again,  the 
same  species  of  bacteria  did  not  always  appear,  but  sometimes  one 
and  then  another.  The  season  of  1892  being  the  last  one  of  the  author's 
stay  in  the  South,  it  was  impossible  to  pursue  the  investigation  further 
The  separation  of  the  bacteria  and  tests  with  each  of  the  species  pres- 
ent in  the  study  of  the  etiology  of  the  disease  might  be  undertaken 
with  advantage  to  clear  up  this  point. 


'Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  41. 


292  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Literature. — "Frenching  of  cotton,"  G.  F.  Atkinson,  Agr.  Jour.,  Montgomery,  Ala., 
Aug.,  1891.  "Additional  note  on  frenching  of  cotton," ibid.,  Sept.,  1891.  ''A  season's 
observation  on  frenching  of  cotton,"  ibid.,  Oct.,  1891.     Alabama  College  Sta.  Bull.  41. 

SORE    SHIN;    DAMPING    OFF;    SEEDLING   ROT. 

These  are  names  applied  to  a  very  common  disease  wliick  causes 
young  plants  to  rot  off  partially  or  entirely  at  or  near  the  surface  of 
the  ground.  There  seem  to  he  several  phases  of  the  disease.  Some- 
times the  tissues  undergo  a  soft  rot,  which  progresses  very  rapidly, 
and  the  early  stages  are  not  marked  by  any  striking  color  characteris- 
tics. Another  phase  may  progress  rapidly  or  slowly  and  is  usually 
quite  well  characterized  by  a  reddish  brown  color  which  accompanies  it. 
This  phase  is  also  characteristic  in  that  it  is  usually  manifested  on  one 
side  of  the  stem  in  the  form  of  an  ulcer  which  gradually  deepens  until 
the  vascular  system  is  reached,  when  the  life  of  the  plant  becomes 
really  endangered.  Even  when  this  stage  is  reached,  however,  the 
plant  may  and  does  frequently  recover.  „ 

This  latter  phase  is  characteristic  of  a  very  common  disease  of  seed- 
ling cotton.  It  is  called  by  the  planters  in  many  places  "  sore  shin." 
Many  planters  say  that  "  sore  shin  "  is  the  result  of  a  mechanical  injury 
to  the  plant  from  a  cut  by  the  "  scrape  "  used  in  cultivation.  The  term 
is  sometimes  applied  to  such  injuries  upon  quite  large  stalks  of  cotton, 
but  it  should  not  be  confused  with  the  "  sore  shin"  of  seedlings  which 
is  caused  by  the  parasitism  of  a  fungus. 

The  fungus  which  is  almost  universally  said  to  be  responsible  for  the 
phenomena  of  "  damping  off"  is  Pythium  debaryanum.  While  all  cases 
of  damping  off  are  not  by  any  means  due  to  this  Pythium,  it  is  quite 
likely  that  many  of  the  cases,  of  what  above  is  termed  a  soft  rot  of 
seedlings,  are  due  to  it. 

The  fungus  with  which  we  are  chiefly  concerned  here  will  be  called 
"  sore  shin  "  fungus  for  convenience,  for  it  is  not  well  known  at  present 
what  the  species  of  fungus  is,  or  even  the  genus,  for  from  all  of  the  arti- 
ficial cultures  yet  obtained  of  it  nothing  but  the  mycelium  and  sclero- 
tium  stage  has  been  obtained. 

The  diseased  portion  of  the  plant  is  just  beneath  the  surface  of  the 
ground  and  presents  an  area  of  shrunken  tissue  of  a  dull  brown  or 
reddish  color.  The  size  of  the  shrunken  area  and  the  depth  of  the 
injury  are  proportionate  to  the  serious  condition  of  the  ulcer,  as  it  may 
be  termed.  If  the  injury  remains  confined  to  the  superficial  tissues  the 
plant  will  usually  recover.  It  does  sometimes  recover  when  the  injury 
reaches  the  vascular  tissue,  but  more  frequently  death  results  when  the 
trouble  has  progressed  thus  far. 

When  the  study  of  the  trouble  was  first  undertaken  an  examination 
of  the  diseased  tissue  showed  the  presence  of  several  fungi.  Besides 
the  frequent  occurrence  of  Bhizopus  nigricans  and  saprophytic  species 
of  Fusarium,  there  were  generally  present  in  great  numbers  nonfruiting 


DISEASES    OF    COTTON.  293 

threads  of  some  fungus.  This  led  to  the  supposition  of  their  causal 
relation  to  the  disease.  The  threads  are  9  to  11  //  in  diameter  and 
the  cells  100  to  200  //  in  length.  At  first  they  are  colorless  and  pos- 
sess numerous  vacuoles  of  varying  sizes  in  the  nearly  homogenous 
protoplasm.  Later  they  become  brown  in  color.  The  branches  extend 
obliquely  from  the  parent  thread,  are  somewhat  narrower  at  their  point 
of  origin,  and  possess  a  septum  usually  15  to  20  /«  from  the  parent 
thread,  giving  a  clavate  form  to  this  part  of  the  branch  which  is  con- 
tinuous with  the  parent  thread.  Frequently  the  hyphse  are  associated 
in  strands,  being  woven  and  twisted  together. 

Pure  cultures. — By  placing  affected  seedlings  on  filter  paper  in  a  moist 
chamber  there  are  developed  in  twenty-four  to  forty-eight  hours  numer- 
ous threads  in  a  horizontal  or  procumbent  position,  which  extend  out 
for  1  to  3  centimeters  over  the  paper,  often  not  contaminated  with  other 
fungi.  By  transplanting  a  few  of  these  threads,  using  a  flamed  platinum 
needle,  into  nutrient  agar  rendered  acid  by  lactic  acid  (1  drop  concen- 
trated lactic  acid  to  about  10  c.  c.  of  nutrient  agar),  a  pure  culture  of 
the  fungus  was  obtained.  A  series  of  experiments  was  conducted  to 
determine  whether  this  fungus  could  really  produce  the  disease  and 
damp  off  the  young  plants. 

The  experiments  showed  that  the  fungus  used  in  the  inoculations  was 
the  cause  of  the  disease  produced  at  that  season  in  the  gardens  and 
fields  examined.  Numerous  cultures  were  made  on  Irish  potatoes,  cot- 
ton stalks,  oak  wood,  cotton  seed,  and  horse  dung,  the  details  of  the 
cultures,  as  well  as  the  experiments  mentioned  above,  being  published 
in  Alabama  Station  Bulletin  41. 

ANTHRACNOSE. 
(Colletotrichum  gossypii  South  worth.) 

The  fungus  causing  anthracnose  of  cotton  was  described  in  1890  by 
Miss  Southworth,1  according  to  whom  the  fungus  was  distributed  in 
Ellis's  North  American  Fungi,2  itnder  the  name  Gleeosporium  carpigenum 
Cooke.  Type  specimens  of  G.  carpigenum  were  examined  by  her  and 
found  to  be  distinct  from  the  cotton  fungus.  The  presence  of  dark  setre 
among  the  basidia  separates  it  from  the  genus  Glceosporium.  During 
the  same  summer  the  fungus  was  studied  quite  independently  by  the 
author,  who  only  learned  of  Miss  South  worth's  study  a  short  time  before 
her  publication  appeared.  His  observations  agreed  with  hers  in  placing 
it  in  the  genus  Colletotrichum.  The  result  of  the  author's  flrst  study 
was  read  before  the  Association  of  American  Agricultural  Colleges  and 
Experiment  Stations  at  Champaign,  111.,  November,  1890,  and  later  pub- 
lished in  the  Journal  of  Mycology.3 

The  fungus  is  probably  very  widely  distributed,  but  serious  injury 


1  Jour.  Mycol.,  Vol.  VI,  No.  3,  1890-91,  p.  100. 

2  Ellis's  North  American  Fungi,  No.  2267,  from  Louisiana. 

3  Jour.  Mycol.,  Vol.  VI,  No.  4,  1890-91,  p.  173. 


294 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


seems  to  be  confined  to  certain  localities.  The  author  has  observed  it 
at  quite  a  number  of  places  in  Alabama,  but  only  at  Brundidge  was 
any  very  serious  injury  to  the  fruit  noted.  At  that  place,  in  September, 
1891,  10  to  50  per  cent  of  the  crop  was  destroyed  on  some  plantations. 
In  the  vicinity  of  Auburn,  while  it  occurs  on  other  parts  of  the  plant 
as  well  as  the  bolls,  its  greatest  injury  seems  to  be  confined  to  the  young 
plants. 

Character*  of  the  disease  on  the  hotls. — The  disease  on  the  bolls  origi- 
nates in  minute  spots.  These  spots,  when  very  small,  are  of  a  dull 
reddish  color,  and  present  minute  shallow  depressions  of  the  surface 

tissue.  As  these  spots 
eidarge  the  tissue  black- 
ens until  the  development 
of  the  spores  begins. 
These  are  developed  in 
pustules,  usually  conflu- 
ent, in  the  center  of  the 
nearly  circular  spot.  With 
their  development  the 
color  of  the  spot  changes. 
If  there  are  a  few  spores 
it  becomes  a  dirty  gray, 
or  a  bright  pink  if  the 
spores  are  numerous. 
Where  the  spores  are  few 
in  number,  many  of  them 
stand  out  upon  the  sur- 
face on  threads  which 
have  grown  up  through 
the  tissue.  The  spores 
being  colorless,  a  grayish 
cast  is  given  to  the  dark 
background  of  diseased 
tissue.  When  the  spores 
are  developed  in  great 
numbers  they  are  piled  up 
into  a  considerable  heap 
and  form  a  large  confluent  mass  occupying  the  central  portion  of  the 
spot.  A  pink  pigment,  given  off  by  the  spores,  is  produced  here  in 
such  quantities  that  it  can  be  seen.  This  gives  the  pink  color  to  the 
spots.  As  the  disease  progresses  the  spots  increase  in  size  and  the 
color  bands  which  surround  the  spots  move  outward  centrifugally. 
The  outer  band,  which  is  the  border  of  the  spot,  is  dull  reddish  brown 
in  color,  and  its  outer  limits  are  ill  defined.  Inside  of  this  border  is  a 
blackish  band,  which  borders  the  pink  center.  As  the  spots  increase 
in  size  they  frequently  coalesce  and  form  large,  irregular,  diseased  areas, 
covering  sometimes  one-half  the  surface  of  the  boll.     If  the  fungus 


Fig.  5.—. Anthracnose. 


DISEASES    OF    COTTON.  295 

attacks  the  bolls  before  they  are  full  grown  it  arrests  the  growth  of  the 
tissues  involved  on  that  side  of  the  boll,  so  that  they  are  frequently 
inequilateral.  It  also  induces  a  premature  ripening-  of  the  tissues,  when 
the  bolls  become  dead,  and  dry  in  fixed  forms.  The  natural  separation 
of  the  carpels  is  prevented.  The  boll  either  remains  closed,  or,  as  is 
more  frequently  the  case,  the  carpels  separate  at  the  apex  only,  so  that 
the  boll  remains  partially  open.  In  either  case  the  fungus  penetrates 
to  the  lint  in  many  cases,  and  is  often  found  upon  it  in  great  abundance. 
In  such  cases  the  seed  is  likely  to  be  included  in  the  attack.  Several 
saprophytic  fungi  are  accompaniinentsof  the  disease  in  these  final  stages. 

Affecting  the  stem. — So  far  as  the  author  has  observed  the  fungus 
does  not  produce  any  characteristic  injury  to  the  stem  of  well-developed 
plants  which  is  noticeable,  but  it  is  frequently  found  in  injured  parts 
of  the  stem,  and  on  the  scars  formed  by  falling  leaves,  where  the  dead 
tissue  of  the  scar,  especially  in  humid  weather,  invites  its  development. 

The  fungus  sometimes  seriously  affects  the  stems  of  seedling  cotton, 
attacking  tlie  stem  at  the  surface  of  the  ground  or  just  below,  and  caus- 
ing the  plant  to  wither  and  die,  much  as  if  it  damped  off.  The  tissue 
reddens  and  shrinks  frequently  in  longitudinal  lines.  The  macroscopic 
appearances  of  the  injury  are  usually  quite  different  from  those  occa- 
sioned by  the  "sore  shin"  fungus.  The  stem  is  not  ax?t  to  present  the 
well-defined  ulcer,  or  diseased  depression,  which  is  so  characteristic  of 
the  injury  from  the  latter.  Seedlings  are  probably  frequently  diseased 
in  this  way  from  the  spores  which  are  lodged  in  the  lint  of  the  seed  at  the 
time  of  planting.  In  cultures  of  young  plants  in  sterilized  soil  annoy- 
ance was  sometimes  caused  by  the  development  of  the  fungus  under 
circumstances  such  that  they  could  have  been  diseased  in  no  other  way 
than  from  spores  which  remained  attached  to  the  seed.  Several  times 
during  the  winter  of  1892  and  1893  cotton  seed  from  Alabama  was 
planted  in  the  forcing  houses  and  botanical  conservatory  of  Cornell 
University,  and  the  fungus  appeared  sufficiently  to  damp  off  and  disease 
several  seedlings.  This  seed,  which  was  gathered  in  the  autumn  of 
1892,  afforded  a  good  illustration  of  the  vitality  of  the  fungus.  Some 
of  these  same  seed  were  planted  during  the  winter  of  1893-94  and  the 
fungus  appeared  upon  the  stems  of  the  young  seedling.  In  all  cases 
where  the  seed  were  scalded  before  planting  the  fungus  did  not  appear. 
The  anthracnose  spores  were  not  found  in  the  lint  in  these  experiments, 
and  it  may  be  some  as  yet  unknown  reproductive  body  accompanying 
the  seed  which  will  retain  its  vitality  for  such  a  long  time.  The  an- 
thracnose spores,  however,  have  been  found  to  germinate  when  taken 
from  the  diseased  bolls  after  five  months.  In  trials  of  some  from  the 
same  bolls  at  seven  months  the  spores  failed  to  grow.  It  is  quite  possi- 
ble that  the  mycelium  may  rest  in  the  tissues  of  the  seed,  as  in  the  case 
of  the  bean  anthracnose,  Collctotrichum  lindemuthianum,  and  probably 
scalding  the  seed  would  not  kill  the  mycelium  within  the  tissues  with- 
out also  killing  the  seed,  although  this  treatment  might  partially  pre- 
vent the  disease. 


296  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

Affecting  the  leaves. — The  anthraciio.se  is  frequently  found  upon  the 
leaves,  it  being  more  liable  to  develop  in  sickly  leaves  or  injured 
places  than  to  attack  healthy  ones.  From  the  partial  saprophytic  habit 
of  the  fungus,  otherwise  diseased  or  injured  leaves  as  well  as  stems 
provide  a  nidus  for  the  propagation  and  transport  of  the  fungus  from 
the  seedlings  through  the  growing  season  to  the  bolls. 

The  seed  leaves,  or  cotyledons,  however,  suffer  from  a  characteristic 
injury.  While  the  seed  is  germinating,  the  spores  caught  in  the  tangle 
of  lint  still  adhering  to  the  seed  coats  germinate  and  attack  the  fleshy 
cotyledons  as  they  are  slipping  from  the  coats.  The  fungus  attacks 
the  edges  of  the  cotyledons  and  destroys  an  irregular  area  bordering 
the  middle  portion.  The  cotyledons,  being  quite  fleshy  and  succulent, 
form  a  suitable  place  for  the  development  of  spores,  and  the  diseased 
area  is  marked  by  the  bright  pink  or  roseate  tint  so  characteristic  of 
its  profuse  development  on  the  fruit. 

The  degree  of  success  which  attends  the  throwing  off  of  the  seed 
coats  by  the  cotyledons  during  germination  probably  bears  a  very  close 
relation  to  their  susceptibility  to  disease.  After  the  young  root  has 
emerged  from  the  seed  coat,  or  "hull,"  if  the  conditions  are  such  as  to 
cause  the  hull  to  dry  and  remain  so,  it  is  cast  off  by  the  cotyledons 
with  difficulty  and  sometimes  not  at  all.  Frequently  the  hull  clings  to 
the  extremities  of  the  cotyledons,  holding  them  firmly,  while  their 
bases  are  exposed  to  the  light  and  consequently  take  on  a  green, 
healthy  color.  The  edges  of  the  cotyledons  thus  held  acquire  a  sickly 
yellow  color,  and  frequently  the  effort  to  extricate  themselves  results 
in. some  abrasion  of  the  tissue.  In  either  case  the  edges  of  the  coty- 
ledons, under  such  unnatural  conditions,  are  an  easy  prey  to  the 
anthracnose  spores  which  fall  on  them  from  the  tangle  of  the  lint  still 
on  the  seed  coat.  Such  cotyledons  are  sometimes  attacked  by  a 
Fusarium,  the  spores  of  which  also  produce  a  pink  pigment,  and  the 
fungus  can  then  only  be  differentiated  from  the  anthracnose  by  the  use 
of  the  microscope. 

Young  plants  have  been  inoculated  by  sowing  the  spores  on  the 
cotyledons.  This  at  first  suggested  the  possibility  of  the  fungus  using 
this  mode  of  entrance  to  the  plant  as  a  means  of  spreading  through 
the  tissues,  to  be  prepared  for  the  final  attack  on  the  fruit  and  other 
parts  of  the  plant,  much  as  is  known  to  be  the  case  in  Cystopus  Can- 
didas and  certain  of  the  Ustilaginea\  Examination  of  the  stem  of 
affected  plants  fails  to  disclose  the  mycelium  in  all  parts  of  the  plant, 
and  there  is  no  evidence  that  the  anthracnose  travels  along  through 
the  plant  from  the  young  stem  or  cotyledons  to  the  bolls  and  leaves. 
Circumstantial  evidence  is  very  strong,  even,  that  this  is  not  the  case. 
At  all  stages  of  the  growing  season  the  fungus  produces  spores  very 
soon  after  germination  takes  place,  so  that  crops  of  spores  are  devel- 
oped in  rapid  succession  where  conditions  for  growth  are  present. 
Furthermore,  the  fungus  is  not  in  any  appreciable  degree  an  obligate 


DISEASES    OE    COTTON.  297 

parasite,  bat  is  markedly  saprophytic  at  times.  There  is  a  reasonable 
possibility  tbat  the  crop  of  spores  produced  on  the  diseased  young- 
stems  or  cotyledons  will  soon  find  an  opportunity  for  growth  and  pro- 
duction of  another  crop  of  spores  at  some  injured  point  on  a  leaf,  or 
upon  the  partly  dying-  tissue  of  leaf  scars.  When  the  fungus  obtains 
a  good  hold  in  the  tissue  of  the  stem  it  does  serious  injury,  which  is 
not  the  case  with  tbe  smuts  in  the  stems  of  tbe  cereals. 

Characters  of  the  fungus. — The  spores  are  oblong,  sometimes  rounded 
at  both  ends,  but  usually  rather  sharply  pointed  at  the  base.  There  is 
usually  a  broad,  shallow  constriction  at  the  middle,  so  that  the  ends  of 
the  spore  are  greater  in  diameter  than  the  middle.  The  protoplasm  is 
distinctly  granular,  and  one  or  more  vacuoles  are  present.  The  spores 
measure  4.5  to  9  by  15  to  20  //.  Where  they  are  produced  on  green 
or  decaying  bolls  or  other  succulent  parts  of  the  xdant  they  are  usually 
associated  iu  distinct  acervuli  or  heaps,  which  are  100  to  150  /.i  in 
diameter.  The  acervuli  are  composed  of  numerous  spores,  with  the  fer- 
tile hyphae  from  which  they  are  developed  and  tbe  underlying  stroma 
within  the  tissues  of  the  plant.  The  fertile  hyphae  are  of  two  kinds. 
Tbe  most  numerous  ones  are  short,  colorless  threads,  arising  from  tbe 
stroma,  and  standing  parallel,  and  very  closely  crowded  together.  They 
are  usually  called  basidia.  The  second  kind  are  long,  dark,  olive-colored, 
septate  setae,  which  are  characteristic  of  the  genus  Colletotrichum.  In 
tbis  species  tbey  bear  spores,  wbich  is  quite  an  unusual  tiring  in  the 
genus.  The  seta?  are  straight,  curved,  or  flexous,  simple  or  rarely 
branched.  They  measure  100  to  150  ju  in  length.  Their  distal  ends 
are  nearly  hyaline,  and  the  spores  borne  upon  them  are  often  obovate, 
tbe  base  being  rather  sharp  pointed.  Tbey  seem  to  arise  later  in  the 
development  of  the  pustule  after  the  ordinary  basidia  are  developed, 
when  parts  of  the  stroma  are  becoming  dark  colored.  They  arise  from 
the  dark  parts  of  tbe  stroma  or  from  rudimentary  sclerotia.  Many 
times  in  young  acervuli  the  seta?  are  not  developed,  and  if  this  condi- 
tion alone  were  known  the  fungus  would  be  referred  to  the  genus 
Gloeosporium. 

Artificial  cultures. — Several  artificial  cultures  were  made  to  trace  the 
development  of  tbe  fungus.  In  some  cases  tbe  nutrient  medium  used 
was  agar  peptone  broth  with  and  without  an  infusion  of  cotton  leaves. 

Tbe  spores  germinate  quite  freely  under  favorable  circumstances  in 
from  four  to  ten  hours.  At  the  time  of  germination  or  prior  to  it,  fre- 
quently one  or  two  transverse  septa  are  observed  in  the  spore,  dividing 
it  into  two  or  tbree  cells.  Several  germ  tubes  may  be  produced  from  a 
single  spore.  Tbe  mycelial  threads  begin  to  branch  immediately,  and 
are  somewhat  flexous  in  their  course.  From  all  parts  of  tbe  mycelium 
short  fertile  branches  soon  arise  of  one,  two,  or  three  cells  length,  wbich 
resemble  the  basidia  and  bear  spores.  Sometimes  these  fertile  branches 
or  basidia  arise  directly  from  the  spore.  In  the  solid  medium  the  spores 
from  a  single  basidium,  when  not  crowded  by  the  basidia  and  other 


298  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

spores,  are  clustered  around  the  end,  each  succeeding  spore  pushing 
the  one  which  lias  just  become  free  to  one  side.  The  sharply  pointed 
basal  end  of  the  spore  favors  this.  After  several  days  there  is  a  beau- 
tiful crown  of  spores  clustered  at  the  end  of  the  basidium,  all  lying 
parallel  to  each  other.  Spores  are  sometimes  produced  within  eighteen 
hours  from  the  time  of  sowing. 

Besides  the  production  of  spores,  certain  branches,  either  remote  from 
or  near  the  center  of  growth,  produce  at  their  ends  peculiar  enlarged 
cells,  olive  brown  in  color  and  varying  in  outline,  but  always  of  greater 
diameter  than  the  hyphae  which  bear  them.  These  bodies  frequently 
produce  immediately  a  normal  hypha  resembling  the  others  of  the 
mycelium.  This  in  turn  may  sooir  produce  another  bud,  or  may  grow 
to  a  considerable  length  and  produce  basidia  and  spores,  or  develop 
spores  soon  after  its  origirr  from  the  bud  like  an  ordinary  basidium.  In 
many  cases  the  gemma  immediately  begins  to  bud  in  an  irregular  man- 
ner, producing  cells  similar  in  color,  but  very  closely  compacted  together 
into  an  irregularly  oval  or  elongated  or  flattened  imperfect  sclerotium. 
After  one  or  two  weeks'  growth  a  large  number  of  these  gemma3  and 
imperfect  sclerotia  are  developed  near  the  center  of  growth.  At  the 
same  time,  the  basidia  have  become  very  numerous  at  this  point,  arising 
from  the  mycelium  or  by  the  branching  of  older  ones,  and  the  mass  of 
spores  assumes  a  roseate  tint.  Cultures  were  also  started  in  pure  water 
and  in  weak  nutrient  medium.  In  water  the  germ  tubes,  when  once  or 
twice  the  length  of  the  spore,  almost  invariably  produced  gernmae.  If 
these  developed  other  tubes  it  was  only  to  give  rise  to  other  gemmae. 
In  no  case  at  that  time  were  spores  produced  nor  any  appreciable 
length  of  mycelium.  In  the  weak  nutrient  medium  the  gemmae  were 
produced  freely;  also  a  number  of  hyphae  produced  spores.  While  the 
vegetative  growth  exceeded  that  of  the  spores  sown  in  water,  there  was 
but  little  compared  with  that  of  spores  sown  in  a  rich  medium,  and  the 
spores  did  not  live  so  long.  These  gemma?  are  sometimes  spoken  of 
as  secondary  spores.  They  are  not  secondary  spores  in  the  usual  accept- 
ance of  that  term.  They  do  not  become  freed  from  the  mycelium  except 
by  accident  or  by  the  dying  of  the  thread  to  which  they  are  attached, 
in  which  case  they  are  more  properly  gemmae.  Their  frequent  later 
development  into  compound  gemmae  by  budding  would  sti  engthen  this 
view,  and  indicate  that  they  are  rudimentary  sclerotia,  or  perhaps 
presage  the  development  of  pycnidial  or  ascigerous  stages,  as  yet 
unknown  in  this  genus. 

In  cultures  on  nutrient  agar  the  author  has  never  observed  setae  to 
develop  in  such  numbers  nor  so  perfectly  as  they  do  naturally  on  the 
host.  But  by  pouring  a  small  quantity  of  agar  on  scorched  lint  in  a 
culture  tube  and  then  inoculating  this  medium  with  spores  the  setae 
developed  profusely. 

During  October,  1893,  cultures  of  the  fungus  were  started  again,  this 
time  from  material  from  Mississippi,  for  the  purpose  of  noting  the  form 


DISEASES    OF    COTTON.  299 

and  growth  characters  of  the  colonies  in  plate  cultures.  The  dilutions 
were  poured  in  Petrie  dishes  and  kept  near  a  north  window,  where  it 
was  rather  cool,  especially  during-  the  night.  The  temperature  ran  up 
during  the  day  to  70°  or  75°  F.  The  development  of  the  colonies  was 
rather  regular  in  contour,  though  a  marked  periodicity  of  growth  was 
induced  by  the  change  of  temperature  from  night  to  day,  resulting  in 
the  formation  of  concentric  rings  upon  the  colonies.  The  weft  of  fun- 
gus threads  was  rather  thin  over  the  entire  colony,  and  radiating  lines 
figured  by  the  threads  were  plainly  discernible  even  when  the  colonies 
were  old.  The  first  germ  tubes  did  not  branch  profusely  in  the  early 
growth,  so  that  directly  around  the  center  of  growth  the  colony  was 
quite  open,  the  threads  not  covering  the  entire  space,  and  the  light 
was  transmitted  through  this  part  much  more  readily  than  through  the 
portions  of  the  colony  surrounding  it.  The  fungus  was  transferred  to 
bean  stems,  and  later  to  sterilized  vetch  stems.  From  this  last  culture 
another  set  of  dilution  cultures  was  started  in  April.  They  were  kept 
at  a  warmer  temperature,  and  while  the  growth  of  the  colonies  was 
similar  to  those  grown  at  a  lower  temperature,  the  size  of  the  colonies 
was  greater  and  all  the  characters  were  shown  on  a  greater  scale. 
Some  of  the  spores  were  quite  small,  so  that  only  one  or  two  germ 
tubes  were  developed  at  one  end.  Since  the  threads  grew  much  more 
rapidly  at  the  higher  temperature  and  branching  was  not  frequent  or 
rapid  at  the  early  stage  of  development,  the  young  colonies  in  these 
cases  presented  elongated,  thin,  and  scarcely  discernible  tufts  issuing 
from  the  point  of  growth.  In  other  cases,  where  several  germ  tubes 
arose  from  all  sides,  numbers  of  these  tufts  extended  in  all  directions 
from  the  center  of  growth.  As  growth  progressed  and  the  colonies 
increased  in  size,  the  periphery  became  more  and  more  compact  by  the 
greater  profusion  in  the  branching.  From  the  small  spores  where  there 
were  but  few  germ  tubes,  and  these  from  one  side  of  the  spore,  the 
colonies  were  un symmetrical,  or  one-sided,  and  the  radiating  threads 
formed  well-marked,  fan-shaped  tufts.  These  fan-shaped  tufts  are  also 
frequently  developed  in  the  symmetrical  colonies  where  the  original 
lines  of  growth  from  the  spore  are  not  sufficient  in  number  to  close  up 
the  periphery  of  the  colony.  This  is  more  marked  where  the  colonies 
are  more  numerous,  as  in  the  first  and  second  dilutions,  while  usually 
in  the  third  dilution,  according  to  the  method  used,  there  were  but  few 
colonies,  the  nutrient  medium  being  not  so  soon  consumed,  and  there 
being  more  room  for  the  advance  of  the  colonies,  they  are  more  apt 
to  close  up  at  the  periphery  and  form  quite  compact  colonies.  The 
un symmetrical  or  eccentric  colonies  in  this  case  form  at  first  several 
beautiful  fan-shaped  tufts,  which  soon  unite  and  form  a  reniform  colony, 
later  to  be  closed  at  the  sinus,  though  the  colony  would  still  remain 
un  symmetric. 

Literature. — "  Aiithracnose  of  cotton,"  South  worth,  Jour.  Mycol.,  vol.  6  (1890-91), 
pp.  100-105.  "  Anthracnose  of  cotton."  G.  F.  Atkinson,  Jour.  Mycol.,  6  (1890-91), 
pp.  173-178.     Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  41. 


300  THE  COTTON  PLANT. 

BOOT  ROT  OP  COTTON  (OZONIUM). 

A  preliminary  account  of  the  root  rot  of  cotton  was  published  by 
Pammel  in  December,  1888.'  A  fuller  account  of  the  investigations 
appeared  in  the  following  November.2  The  following  account  is  an 
extract  of  the  latter,  supplemented  by  the  results  of  the  author's  own 
investigations. 

The  disease  is  a  true  rot  caused  by  one  of  the  higher  fungi,  but  noth- 
ing as  yet  has  been  found  except  the  rhizomorphic  and  a  sclerotia  like 
condition,  so  that  the  affinities  of  the  fungus  are  still  unknown.  The 
fungus  was  published  by  Pammel  provisionally  as  Ozonium  auricomum 
Link,  but  it  is  quite  likely  that  it  is  not  identical  with  that  species. 
Certainly  it  is  not  identical  with  several  specimens  which  occur  in  some 
of  the  European  exsiccata?.  It  will  here  be  spoken  of  simply  as 
"Ozonium." 

There  is  a  general  belief  among  planters  that  certain  soils  only  har- 
bor the  disease.  The  investigations  showed,  however,  that  nearly  all 
classes  of  soil  are  more  or  less  subject  to  it.  Planters  suffer  most 
from  the  disease  in  the  central  black  prairie  region  of  Texas.  Its 
northern  boundary  is  the  lied  River  as  far  east  as  Paris,  Tex.,  extend- 
ing in  a  southwesterly  direction  to  San  Antonio  and  thence  westward. 
The  counties  of  Montague,  Wise,  Parker,  and  Hamilton  are  the  west- 
ern boundary  in  the  north.  A  white  rotten  limestone,  often  cropping 
out,  underlies  the  entire  region.  The  soil  of  these  black  waxy  prairie 
lands  is  very  retentive  of  moisture,  which  is  a  condition  favorable  to 
the  development  of  the  fungus.  The  moisture  is  especially  abundant 
when  the  limestone  comes  near  the  surface  of  the  soil.  The  cotton  fre- 
quently dies  from  the  disease  on  the  limestone  ridges  and  slopes  when 
none  is  affected  in  other  parts  of  the  field.  For  the  discussion  of  the 
various  theories  which  have  been  advanced  to  explain  the  cause  of 
the  disease  before  it  was  shown  to  be  due  to  thei>arasitism  of  a  fungus, 
reference  should  be  made  to  Pammel's  work. 

Characters  of  the  disease. — The  first  indication  manifested  by  the  cot- 
ton plants  of  the  activity  of  the  fungus  is  the  sudden  wilting  of  one  or 
more  plants.  This  is  usually  first  noticed  in  the  latter  part  of  June 
and  early  in  July,  though  the  time  varies  with  the  locality.  Planters 
sometimes  associate  the  dying  of  cotton  with  the  appearance  of  flowers 
and  the  bolls,  but  from  the  condition  of  fields  early  in  July  it  seems 
that  it  makes  its  appearance  much  earlier  in  the  season.  R.  D.  Black- 
shear,  of  Navasota,  Tex.,  has  reported  plants  dead  from  the  trouble  as 
early  as  May  G,  and  certainly  quite  young  plants  are  affected  with  it. 
The  fungus  has  been  seen  on  plants  only  G  inches  high.  The  sudden 
wilting  of  a  considerable  number  of  plants  does  not  occur,  however, 
until  near  the  middle  of  June  or  later.  The  wilting  of  a  single  plant 
here  or  there  in  the  field  might  be  overlooked  or  be  attributed  to  some 

1  Texas  Sta.  Bui.  4.  *  Texas  Sta.  Bui.  7. 


DISEASES    OF    COTTON. 


301 


other  cause.  This  explains  why  from  general  observation  the  disease 
is  thought  to  appear  first  at  a  later  period.  From  a  single  stalk  which 
dies  in  May  or  June  the  disease  may  spread  so  that  areas  of  consid- 
erable extent  will  be  affected  by  the  close  of  the  season.  The  dead 
patches  have  no  definite  boundaries,  but  extend  in  all  directions 
through  the  field,  the  black  streaks  and  patches  formed  by  the  dead 
plants  occasionally  containing  a  few  green  plants.  In  passing  through 
the  belt  where  the  disease  is  prevalent  a  striking  contrast  is  observed 
between  the  areas  made  black  by  the  dead  plants,  everywhere  so  con- 
spicuous in  the  fields,  and 
the  interspersed  green 
areas  of  apparently  healthy 
plants.  Tbe  suddenness 
with  which  plants  die  is 
governed  somewhat  by  the 
atmospheric  and  soil  condi- 
tions, rianters  frequent- 
ly say  that  dry  weather 
checks  the  disease.  Dur- 
ing the  dry  weather  in 
August,  1888,  few  plants 
were  dying.  In  the  latter 
part  of  August  the  rains 
set  in,  and  then  during 
intervals  of  sunshine  large 
numbers  of  plants  wilted. 
In  June  and  July,  1889,  it 
was  again  noticed  that 
more  plants  gave  the  ex- 
ternal evidence  of  disease 
after  a  rainy  day  which 
was  followed  by  warm  sun- 
shine than  during  several 
days  of  dry  weather. 

Healthy  plants  are  fre- 
quently found  close  to 
diseased  ones  even  late  in 
the  season,  but  it  does  not 

follow  that  such  green  plants  are  not  affected  with  the  disease,  as  has 
been  shown  to  be  the  case  by  examination.  For  example,  eight  plants 
were  found  growing  in  a  cluster,  two  of  which  had  wilted,  and  in  each 
case  tlie  taproot  was  covered  by  the  mycelium.  In  two  of  the  green 
plants  the  taproot  contained  an  abundance  of  the  fungus,  and  the 
plants  would  probably  have  wilted  in  a  very  few  days.  In  two  other 
cases  a  small  amount  of  the  fungus  was  found  on  the  roots,  while  only 
a  single  one  at  that  time  was  apparently  exempt. 


Fig.  6.— Root  rot. 


302  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Every  plant  which  presents  the  pathological  conditions  above  de- 
scribed possesses  the  fungus  on  the  roots,  if  we  add  to  the  sudden 
wilting  of  the  plant  the  characteristic  shrunken  areas  of  the  roots. 
Under  the  article  on  trenching  it  will  be  seen  that  -sometimes  this 
disease  causes  the  plants  to  wilt  suddenly  under  atmospheric  conditions 
similar  to  those  which  are  most  favorable  to  the  sudden  wilting  of  the 
plants  from  the  Ozonium. 

If  the  roots  of  plants  just  dead  from  the  disease  be  examined,  fre- 
quently there  are  small  "wart-like"  bodies  on  the  surface,  which  very 
often  occupy  the  lenticels  of  the  root.  These  are  probably  the  same  as 
the  sclerotia-like  bodies,  which  are  described  farther  on.  Plants  which 
have  not  yet  succumbed  to  the  disease,  but  which  are  affected,  .show 
the  presence  of  the  fungus  on  the  root,  sometimes  in  considerable  quan- 
tity, so  that  it  appears  as  if  the  root,  or  a  portion  of  it,  were  covered 
with  a  whitish  mold.  The  white  threads  gradually  assume  a  brown 
color,  beginning  in  the  older  portions.  The  taproot  is  usually  the  first 
to  be  attacked,  and  the  point  which  the  fungus  first  invests  is  some- 
where near  the  surface  of  the  ground.  It  does  not  begin  at  the  tip  or 
near  the  tip  of  the  root,  and  in  many  cases  the  lower  portion  of  the 
root  is  free  from  the  fungus,  at  least  in  the  early  stages.  In  cross 
sections  of  the  diseased  roots  the  characteristic  threads  of  the  fungus 
are  seen  to  extend  into  the  medullary  rays  and  into  the  vessels.  The 
threads  within  the  tissues  of  the  root  do  not  become  brown  in  color,  and 
there  are  not  the  peculiar  branching  setSB,  but  the  identity  of  the  threads 
with  the  fungus  upon  the  surface  can  be  determined  by  the  direct  con- 
tinuation of  the  superficial  threads  with  the  internal  ones. 

The  fungus  derives  its  nourishment  from  the  living  substances  of  the 
root,  and  also  in  its  physiological  processes  sets  up  certain  fermentations 
which  kill  the  affected  portions,  causing  partial  decomposition,  which 
results  in  the  shrinking  of  the  tissues  and  the  formation  of  quite  exten- 
sive depressed  areas.  The  borders  of  these  depressions  show  at  first  a 
red  discoloration,  which  ultimately  becomes  brown.  Near  the  surface 
of  the  soil  an  enlargement  frequently  is  formed  in  which  elaborated 
materials  are  apparently  stored  during  the  progress  of  the  disease. 
From  these  enlargements  new  roots  are  frequently  developed  as  the 
lower  roots  are  placed  under  contribution  to  the  parasite.  These  help, 
in  favorable  weather,  to  prolong  the  life  of  the  plant,  but  are  usually 
not  sufficiently  developed  to  prevent  the  collapse  of  the  plant  when  the 
older  roots  give  way.  When  the  roots  become  seriously  injured,  root 
absorption  of  material  from  the  soil  becomes  so  diminished  that  it  is  not 
equal  to  transpiration  from  the  large  leaf  surface,  and  the  plant  wilts. 

In  the  affected  areas  the  disease  spreads  from  year  to  year  in  a  cen- 
trifugal manner,  the  fungus  making  its  way  through  the  soil  from 
plant  to  plant. 

The  lint  of  the  diseased  cotton  is  injured,  the  fibers  are  wider,  and 
the  spirals  are  fewer  and  more  uneven  than  in  lint  from  healthy  plants. 


DISEASES    OF    COTTON.  303 

Some  have  supposed  that  the  disease  could  be  trausmitted  through  the 
seed,  but  experiments  have  shown  that  this  is  not  the  case. 

Morphology  of  the  fungus. — The  threads  which  are  found  upon  the 
surface  of  the. roots  are  usually  associated  in  strands  which  course 
over  the  surface  of  the  root  irregularly  and  branch  quite  frequently. 
The  internal  threads  are  sometimes  associated  in  parallel  layers,  but 
are  not  formed  into  distinct  strands  like  those  upon  the  surface.  The 
cells  are  hyaline,  usually  short,  and  of  a  greater  diameter  than  the 
separate  superficial  threads  or  those  upon  the  surface  of  the  strands. 
The  threads  which  compose  the  strands  are  usually  of  a  greater  diam- 
eter in  the  inside  of  the  strand  and  smaller  upon  the  surface.  From 
the  surface  of  the  strands  there  are  numerous  free  threads  which  stand 
out  at  various  angles.  Many  of  them  are  quite  peculiar  and  character- 
istic of  this  fungus.  They  terminate  in  a  long  slender  point,  and  fre- 
quently possess  opposite  or  verticillate  branches  of  the  same  character. 
No  fruiting  condition  in  the  form  of  conidia  has  as  yet  been  determined, 
nor  any  form  analagous  to  the  fruit  body  of  any  known  fungus. 

The  Ozonium  auricomum  Link,  of  Europe,  is  very  different  from  the 
above  fungus,  though  it  is  similar  in  habit  in  many  cases  and  produces 
diseases  of  the  roots  of  various  plants.  The  space  is  too  limited  here 
for  a  discussion  of  the  diseases  due  to  this  fungus,  but  mention  should 
be  made  of  the  supposed  complemeutal  or  fruiting  form  which  has  been 
reported  in  a  number  of  cases  in  Europe.  The  complemental  fruiting 
form  is  given  in  many  cases  by  different  authors  as  a  very  distinct 
fungus,  which  is  evidence  that  very  much  weight  can  not  be  given  to 
the  specific  determination  of  these  root  fungi  by  the  rhizomorphic  form 
only,  unless  there  seems  to  be  some  very  characteristic  features,  as 
in  the  case  of  the  Texas  Ozonium,  which  mark  it  very  clearly.  The 
European  Ozonium  is  said  by  Schroeter1  to  be  the  undeveloped  condi- 
tion of  Coprinus  radians  Penzig2,  of  G.  intermedins  Winter3  and  Sac- 
cardo4,  of  Tramates  odorata  Holuby5,  of  Agaricus  diliquescens.  This 
would  seem  to  show  that  the  European  Ozonium  was  at  least  the  rhizo- 
morphic form  of  one  of  the  Hymenomycetes.  Pammel  is  inclined  to 
think  that  the  Texas  Ozonium  is  the  undeveloped  form  of  some  Pyre- 
nomycetous  fungus,  probably  being  influenced  in  forming  this  opinion 
by  the  discovery  of  the  frequent  association  of  a  fungus  in  the  roots 
of  the  diseased  cotton  and  sweet  potatoes  which  possesses  blackish 
rotund  bodies  that  resemble  the  perithecia  of  some  Pyrenomycetes,  and 
also  by  a  doubtful  artificial  culture  which  he  obtained  by  washing  the 
tin  eads  of  the  Ozonium.  The  cultures  obtained  from  this  were  not 
in  any  way  like  those  of  the  fungus  as  it  appears  in  its  natural  habitat, 

1  Kryptogameu  Flora  von  Scblesieu,  B<1.  Ill,  1st  Hefte,  Pilze,  1889,  p.  519. 
2Sui  rapporti  j^enetici   tra  Ozonium  et  Coprinus,  Nuovo  Giorn.  Bot.  Ital.,  XII, 
pp.  132-143. 
3Die  Pilze,  in  Kabenborst's  Kryptogameu  Flora  von  Deutscbland,  I,  p.  405. 
4Saccardo,  Sylloge  Fung.,  VI,  p.  345. 
5Zur  Kryptogameu  Flora  von  Ns.  Podbrad,  Oest.  Bot.  Ztscbr.,  1874,  No.  10. 


304  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

but  it  was  suggested  that  this  might  be  due  to  the  influence  of  the 
artificial  medium.  The  pure  cultures  obtained  by  the  author  later  show 
that  this  could  not  be  the  case.  Pammel  himself  did  not  place  much 
confidence  in  the  results  from  his  supposed  cultures  of  the  Ozonium. 
But  this  makes  little  difference  from  the  standpoint  of  the  treatment  of 
the  disease. 

Treatment. — The  results  of  experiments  at  the  Texas  Station1  show 
that  the  disease  can  not  be  controlled  by  any  application  to  the  soil  at 
present  known.  Rotation  of  crops  seems  to  be  the  only  method  which 
will  keep  the  fungus  in  check.  There  are,  however,  a  large  number  of 
other  plants  upon  which  the  fungus  can  grow  readily.  If  plants  which 
are  susceptible  to  attacks  from  the  Ozonium  are  grown  year  after 
year  on  the  same  ground  the  soil  becomes,  after  awhile,  so  thoroughly 
infected  with  the  fungus  that  the  crop  will  not  grow  to  any  extent. 
Corn,  sorghum,  millet,  wheat,  oats,  and  other  members  of  the  grass 
family  are  suggested  as  desirable  crops  to  grow  in  rotation  with  sus- 
ceptible plants.  Some  suggest  a  rotation  which  will  bring  cotton  or  a 
susceptible  crop  into  cultivation  .on  infected  soil  not  oftener  than  once 
in  three  or  four  years. 

Other  plants  subject  to  the  disease — Pammel  names  the  following  plants 
as  subject  to  attacks  from  the  Ozonium,  and  from  which  the  disease 
may  be  communicated  to  cotton  grown  in  the  same  soil:  All  nursery 
stock  except  species  of  the  genus  Prunus,  apple  trees,  Russian  and 
paper  mulberry,  China  berry,  Japanese  persimmon  grafted  on  native 
persimmon,  elm,  basswood,  and  silver  maple.  Of  these  the  China  berry 
and  paper  mulberry  trees  suffer  most  severely.  In  August,  1888,  the 
roots  of  a  number  of  living  China  berry  trees  were  observed  to  be 
covered  with  the  fungus,  and  in  the  following  year  they  were  found  to 
be  dead,  and  the  disease  had  spread  to  some  young  paper  mulberry 
trees  in  the  neighborhood. 

Old  and  dying  trees  frequently  develop  suckers.  At  Anna  a  num- 
ber of  paper  mulberry  trees  nearly  dead  produced  hundreds  of  suckers 
from  6  inches  to  2  feet  high  which  covered  an  area  of  several  rods. 
The  suckers  were  wilting  in  large  numbers  and  many  were  dead. 
Specimens  of  the  pear  from  Burnet  County  had  the  fungus  on  the  roots, 
but  the  trees  had  been  dead  for  some  time  and  it  was  thought  that  the 
fungus  worked  only  as  a  saprophyte  on  these  trees.  When  young 
apple  trees  are  affected  with  the  fungus  the  leaves  suddenly  wilt  and 
turn  black  and  in  a  short  time  the  trees  perish.  In  older  trees  death 
is  more  gradual.  They  have  a  sickly  appearance  several  years  prior  to 
death,  bear  a  heavy  crop  of  fruit,  and  then  die.  The  Ozonium  disease 
of  apple  trees  must  not  be  confounded  with  the  trouble  brought  about 
by  the  presence  of  aphides  (Schizoneura  lanigera)  on  the  roots,  which 
develop,  as  the  result  of  injury,  irregular  knots  on  the  roots.  Some- 
times both  the  aphides  and  the  Ozonium  are  found  upon  the  same  root. 


'Texas  Sta.  Bui.  7. 


DISEASES    OF    COTTON.  305 

Weeds  affected  by  the  fungus. — The  common  sida  (Sida  spinosa)  is 
very  commonly  attacked  by  the  Ozonium  in  infected  fields.  Even  in 
fields  well  cared  for  by  the  planter  this  weed  may  be  found  in  limited 
numbers.  Frequently  in  such  cases  as  well  as  where  the  weed  is  more 
abundant  it  is  found  to  be  attacked  by  the  disease.  This  would  be 
expected,  at  least  since  other  plants  are  known  to  be  subject  to  the 
attacks  of  the  fungus,  because  the  sida  belongs  to  the  same  family  as 
the  cotton  plant.  The  fact  that  this  weed  is  subject  to  the  attacks  of 
the  fungus  and  that  it  is  a  very  widely  distributed  and  common  weed 
throughout  the  cotton  belt  is  one  difficulty  in  the  way  of  success  from 
the  rotation  of  crops.  The  ragweed  and  cocklebur  and  some  other 
Composite  were  found  to  be  affected  by  the  fungus.  In  all  the  cases 
observed  the  attack  upon  these  plants  seemed  to  follow  some  injury  of 
a  mechanical  nature.  There  was  no  doubt  that  the  fungus  caused  the 
death  of  the  plants  in  question,  but  it  was  considered  doubtful  if  they 
initiated  the  trouble. 

In  orchards  and  nurseries  all  diseased  plants  should  be  dug  up  and 
burned.  Care  should  be  exercised  in. the  purchase  of  nursery  stock  to 
see  that  the  roots  are  perfectly  healthy.  In  the  use  of  sweet  potatoes 
for  seed  great  care  should  also  be  taken,  for  in  the  use  of  affected  pota- 
toes or  the  planting  of  affected  nursery  stock  the  fungus  may  be  trans- 
planted to  soils  in  which  formerly  the  fungus  was  not  present. 
.  To  the  above-mentioned  plants  which  are  subject  to  the  Ozonium 
should  be  added  alfalfa.1 

ARTIFICIAL   CULTURES   OF   THE   OZONIUM."2 

During  the  summer  of  1891  the  author  made  several  attempts  to 
secure  pure  cultures  of  this  fungus  from  material  received  from  Texas. 
The  affected  roots  were  placed  on  sand  in  moist  chambers,  and  the 
fungus  strands  grew  in  several  instances  from  4  to  6  inches  out  over 
the  surface  of  the  sand.  Portions  of  these  strands  were  transferred 
to  nutrient  media  and  failed  to  grow. 

In  1892  the  work  was  again  undertaken,  the  author  being  supplied 
once  or  twice  a  week  with  fresh  material.  Each  root  before  shipment 
was  carefully  wrapped  separately  Avith  moist  paper,  retaining  a  small 
portion  of  the  earth  with  it,  several  of  such  roots  making  a  single 
package.  Before  receiving  the  specimens  the  author  prepared  several 
moist  chambers  in  the  following  manner:  A  layer  of  sand  about  one- 
half  inch  deep  was  placed  in  a  glass  vessel  and  covered  with  four  thick- 
nesses of  filter  paper;  the  sand  and  paper  were  then  moistened  with 
distilled  water  and  the  cover  placed  in  position.  The  moist  chambers 
were  sterilized  in  an  oven  at  a  temperature  of  110°  C.  for  an  hour  or 
two  for  two  successive  days.  On  the  arrival  of  the  roots  they  were 
carefully  unwrapped,  the  earth  removed,  the  roots  washed  with  dis- 
tilled water  and  cut  into  pieces  5  cm.  long,  and  placed  horizontally  on 
filter  paper,  four  or  five  sections  in  each  chamber.     In  two  or  three 


1  Texas  Sta.  Bui.  22.  2Bot.  Gaz.  18  (1893),  No.  1,  pp.  16-19. 

1993— No.  33 20 


306  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

days  the  strands  of  Ozonium  could  be  seen  growing  out  over  the  filter 
paper  for  a  distance  of  4  to  G  cm.  Sterilized  glass  slides  were  now 
placed  at  the  advancing  end  of  the  strands,  and  upon  these  were  placed 
small  sections  of  cotton  roots  which  had  been  previously  boiled  and 
then  steamed  for  several  hours  to  sterilize  them  thoroughly.  Sections 
of  such  roots  about  3  cm.  long  were  placed  upon  the  glass  slide  so  as  to 
come  in  contact  with  the  fungus.  At  the  same  time  similar  sections 
of  sterilized  cotton  roots  were  placed  in  test  tubes  in  moist  sand  and 
partially  immersed  in  distilled  water.  In  twenty-four  to  forty-eight 
hours  the  Ozonium  strands  would  take  hold  of  the  bait  placed  before 
them,  so  that  the  section  of  root  could  be  transferred  bodily  to  prepared 
culture  tubes.  The  end  containing  the  growth  was  placed  in  contact 
with  the  sterilized  root  already  in  the  tube. 

Sterilized  sweet  potatoes  were  also  used  in  test  tubes  as  media  for 
transplanting.  The  fungus  grew  rather  slowly,  but  out  of  75  baits 
which  were  promising  4  or  5  proved  to  be  pure.  From  these,  cultures 
were  multiplied  to  the  number  of  50.  Great  difficulty  was  encountered 
to  prevent  the  contamination  by  several  species  of  fungi  and  bacteria. 
The  Ozonium  on  artificial  media,  such  as  sterilized  cotton  roots  or  sweet 
potatoes,  grows  readily  after  once  securing  a  firm  hold,  and  possesses  all 
the  other  characteristics  observable  in  a  natural  condition  upon  the 
cotton  roots.  Being  free  from  obstruction  and  hindrances  which  it 
encounters  in  nature,  the  growth  is  perhaps  more  compact,  numerous 
strands  uniting  to  form  a  brown  weft,  but  the  peculiar  strands  were 
present  as  well  as  the  characteristic  and  branched  seta?. 

Since  the  first  transplantings  the  author  has  become  more  familiar 
with  the  habits  of  the  fungus,  and  has  found  it  an  easy  matter  to  cul- 
tivate it  with  certainty  and  in  profusion. 

The  Ozonium  grew  steadily  over  the  sterilized  cotton  roots  in  a  broad 
weft,  the  threads  of  which  radiated  from  the  point  of  infection.  The 
line  of  advance  is  rather  irregular,  due  to  the  unequal  growth  of  the 
filaments.  The  weft  is  white  for  several  days,  when  numerous  branches 
arise  on  the  free  surface,  giving  it  a  woolly  appearance.  Later,  promi- 
nent strands  appear,  lying  in  irregular  parallels.  About  this  time  the 
color  changes  to  a  light  yellowish  brown,  the  characteristic  color  of 
the  older  phases  of  the  fungus. 

After  considerable  growth  has  been  made  sclerotia-like  bodies  appear. 
They  are  from  very  small  to  3  mm.  in  diameter,  whitish  and  woolly, 
finally  becoming  of  the  same  color  as  the  filaments  of  the  fungus. 
Internally  the  sclerotia  are  hyaline,  and  the  cell  walls  are  very  thin. 
The  outer  portion  is  composed  of  threads  similar  to  those  of  the 
strands. 

The  development  of  the  sclerotia  was  checked,  and  the  experiment 
was  begun  anew  in  the  winter  of  1892-93.  Having  no  cotton  roots  on 
which  to  grow  the  fungus,  apple-tree  root,  sweet  potatoes,  and  horse 
dung  were  substituted  as  culture  media.  The  fungus  grew  quite  well, 
but  failed  to  produce  any  sclerotia. 


DISEASES    OF    COTTON.  307 

The  structure  of  the  strands  and  threads  conformed  essentially  with 
Pammel's  description.  Some  of  the  threads  which  form  the  early 
stages  of  the  strands  are  much  larger  than  others,  and  are  strongly  con- 
stricted at  the  septa.  Branches  of  various  sizes  put  out  from  the  parent 
thread,  and  in  their  growth  closely  invest  it  in  a  sinuous  and  irregular 
spiral.  Other  branches  put  out  from  the  first  in  the  manner  just  de- 
scribed, the  new  branches  following  the  general  direction  of  the  strand. 
The  branching  of  the  strands  depends  to  a  certain  extent  upon  the  branch- 
ing of  the  primary  threads.  The  formation  of  the  strands  resembles  the 
formation  of  the  cortical  layer  of  some  of  the  species  of  Batrachospermum 
or  the  covering  of  the  axial  filament  of  species  of  Lemanea. 

In  artificial  cultures,  near  the  ends  of  some  threads  were  observed 
swellings  resembling  oogonia.  Sometimes  the  enlarged  end  of  the 
hypha  is  brought  in  contact  with  these  oogonia-like  bodies,  as  though 
to  fertilize  them,  but  nothing  resembling  the  fertilized  oogonium  was 
observed  by  the  author.  The  bodies  here  described  quickly  disinte- 
grate. At  first  this  phenomenon  was  thought  to  be  preliminary  to  the 
formation  of  some  sort  of  fruiting  body,  but  it  seems  more  likely  that 
the  protoplasm,  developing  certain  acids  having  a  strong  affinity  for 
water,  imbibes  large  quantities  of  water,  and  the  branches  become 
abnormally  swollen  before  their  disintegration. 

Besides  the  Ozonium  in  several  cases  another  fungus  was  present, 
which  has  been  supposed  by  some  to  be  another  stage  of  the  one  under 
discussion.  In  the  case  of  this  one  the  mycelium  is  dark  in  color,  and 
dark  perithecia-like  bodies  have  been  noticed  by  Pammel  and  the  author, 
and  the  author  noticed  in  some  cultures  a  peculiar  form  of  budding; 
but  while  the  fungus  was  carried  through  several  cultures  at  different 
times,  none  of  the  supposed  fruit  bodies  produced  spores,  so  that  the 
exact  position  of  the  fungus  is  mere  speculation.  That  it  is  different 
from  the  Ozonium  there  is  little  doubt,  since  in  artificial  cultures  of 
two  complemental  forms  of  the  same  fungus  there  should  be  some  indi- 
cation in  one  of  them  of  the  affinity.  There  was,  however,  throughout 
the  entire  series  of  cultures  of  both  fungi  no  form  or  appearance  which 
indicated  the  least  resemblance  that  could  be  taken  as  indicating  an 
affinity  between  the  two. 

During  the  cultures  many  saprophytic  fungi  came  under  the  author's 
observation  which  were  associated  with  the  Ozonium  on  the  roots  in 
the  soil.  Some  of  these  were  obtained  as  pure  cultures  on  the  baits 
which  were  set  for  the  Ozonium.  Some  of  these  were  sent  to  A.  P. 
Morgan,  Preston,  Hamilton  County,  Ohio,  for  determination.  The 
fungi  noted  in  this  connection  were  as  follows:  (Edocejtltalum  echinu- 
latum  Thaxter,  Sporotrichum  chlorinum  Link,  Penicillium  candidum 
Link,  P.  glaueum  Link,  P.  duclauxi  Delacr.,  Mucor  inucedo  Linn., 
RMzopus  nigricans  Ehr.,  Licea  lindheimeri  Berk'?,  Verticillium  rexianum 
Sacc,  a  species  of  Eurotiuin,  several  species  of  Fusarium  which  were 
very  common,  the  fungus  described  in  the  paragraph  on  damping  off, 
several  nonfruiting  forms,  a  pink  yeast,  and  several  species  of  bacteria. 


308  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

It  would  be  very  interesting,  from  a  scientific  standpoint,  to  know 
the  perfect  or  fruiting  form  of  this  Ozonium  on  cotton  roots.  If  a 
pure  culture  could  be  again  obtained,  and  then  grown  on  a  large  num- 
ber of  sterilized  cotton  roots  all  massed  together  in  some  sod  in  a  place 
where  moisture  conditions  would  be  favorable,  in  time  this  form  might 
be  developed.  The  failure  to  obtain  this  form  in  the  above  trials  is 
attributed  to  the  fact  that  all  the  cultures  were  carried  on  on  too  small 
a  scale,  so  that  there  was  not  a  sufficient  amount  of  roots  in  one  place, 
and  the  moisture  conditions  were  subject  to  too  great  variations,  so 
that  in  the  course  of  a  few  weeks  the  culture  would  become  partially 
dry  or  completely  so.  The  environment  should  be  such  that  proper 
conditions  of  moisture  could  be  sustained  for  a  year  or  more.  The 
author's  study  of  the  fungus  thus  far,  however,  leads  to  the  belief  that 
when  this  form  is  discovered  it  will  prove  to  belong  to  some  genus  of 
the  Hymenomycetes. 

COTTON-LEAF  BLIGHT. 

(Splucrella  gossypiva  Atkinson.) 

The  cotton  leaf  blight  is  a  very  common  disease  of  the  cotton  plant, 
but  it  very  rarely  becomes  serious.  It  usually  attacks  only  the  older 
leaves  or  those  which  have  become  weakened  by  physiological  disturb- 
ances affecting  the  nutrition  or  assimilation  of  the  leaves.  The  fungus 
was  first  known  iu  what  is  called  the  imperfect  form,  or  conidial  stage. 
This  form  of  it  was  described  by  Cooke  as  Gercospora  gossypina.  The 
diseased  areas  on  the  leaf  are  in  the  form  of  rounded,  irregular  spots, 
which  possess  a  dull  reddish  border  surrounding  a  brownish  or  whitish 
central  area.  In  the  central  area  the  fungus  is  located.  The  inter- 
cellular mycelium  consists  of  irregular,  branched,  septate  threads, 
which  here  and  there  near  the  surface  develop  a  tuberculate  stroma 
that  gives  rise  to  tufts  of  emergent  hypha?,  brownish  in  color  and 
several  times  septate.  Long,  slender,  terete,  septate,  hyaline  conidia 
are  borne  at  the  ends  of  the  hypha*.  After  one  hypha  has  developed 
a  conidium  this  becomes  freed  and  the  hypha  grows  out  at  one  side  of 
the  end  and  bears  another  conidium.  This  process  is  usually  repeated 
several  times,  so  that  each  hypha  bears  several  conidia,  and  the  hypha 
presents  a  toothed  or  zigzag  form  at  the  fr nit- bearing  end,  each  tooth 
or  angle  representing  the  place  by  a  scar  where  a  conidium  had  grown. 
These  conidia  germinate  by  the  y>rod  action  of  a  germ  tube  at  any  or 
all  of  the  usually  numerous  cells.  These  penetrate  the  tissue  of  fresh 
leaves  and  spread  the  disease.  The  spots  first  appear  as  minute  red- 
dish dots,  which  increase  in  size  centrifugally,  and  finally  the  center 
becomes  brownish,  leaving  the  red  border  which  is  characteristic  of  the 
spots.  As  the  spots  become  old  the  central  portion  frequently  becomes 
broken  out,  leaving  the  leaves  with  a  perforated  and  ragged  appearance. 

This  fungus  quite  frequently  attacks  the  leaves  of  cotton  affected 
with  the  mosaic  disease.  In  some  phases  of  the  mosaic  disease  it  is 
the  commonest  fungus  on  the  leaves,  and  as  the  leaves  die  they  become 


DISEASES    OF    COTTON. 


309 


1 

.^ 


curled  in  various  ways,  and  during  favorable  weather,  as  during  rains 
in  the  hot  summer  time,  a  great  profusion  of  hyphse  and  conidia  are 
developed.    The  brown  hyphae  give  a  blackish  appearance  to  the  leaf, 
while  the  colorless  conidia  form  a  whitish  covering  to  portions  of  it. 
The  conidia  and  hyplme,  under  these  circumstances,  are  very  long.     On 
such  leaves  the  perfect,  or  Splmerella,  stage  of  the  fungus  is  quite  likely 
to  be  developed.     These  have  been  found  in  several  parts  of  Alabama, 
and  they   undoubt- 
edly occur  in  all  the  A 
cotton-producing                                                        j,?^ 
States.     This  stage                                               /;;' 
of  the  fungus  (Sphce- 
rella  gossypina)  was 
first  described  iu  a 
bulletin  of  the  Tor- 
rey  Botanical  Club.1 
The  perithecia  are 
ovate  and  nearly 
black,  and  partly 
immersed  in  the  tis- 
sue of  the  leaf,  the 
ostiolum    and    the 
apical  portion   pro- 
jecting through  the 
epidermis.     They 
measure  GO  to  70  /u. 
The  asci  vary  from 
clavate  to  lanceolate 
or  subcylindrical, 
measuring  40  to  50 
by  S  to  10  fi.     They 
are  eight- spored,  the 
spores  being  ellipti- 
cal or  nearly  fusoid,  and  slightly  constricted  at  the  single  septum,  which 
divides  the  spore  into  two  unequal  cells. 

Literature. — Cooke,  Grevillea  12  (1883),  p.  31.  "  Cotton-leaf  blight,"  F.  Lainson- 
Scribner,  U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Rpt.  1887,  p.  355.  "Sphserella  gossypina,"  etc.,  G.  F. 
Atkinson,  Torr.  Bot.  Club,  Bui.  18  (1891),  No.  10.  Alabama  College  Sta.  Buls.  27, 
36,  and  41.     Bot.  Gaz.,  16  (1891),  p.  62. 

AREOLATE  MILDEW  OF  COTTON. 


Fig.  7. — Arfiolate  mildew. 


(Ramularia  areola  Atkinson.) 

This  mildew  is  confined  to  definite  areolate  portions  of  the  leaf,  the 
areas  being  limited  by  the  veiulets.  The  clusters  of  short  hyphse  which 
project  through  the  epidermis  to  the  outside  of  the  leaf  and  the  num- 
bers of  conidia  borne  upon  them  give  a  mildewed  or  frosted  appearance 


'No.  10,  1891. 


310  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

to  the  spots.  The  hyphse  are  colorless,  usually  simple,  though  sometimes 
branched,  and  divided  into  short  cells.  The  conidia  are  short  oblong, 
one  to  three  septate,  the  ends  being  usually  abruptly  pointed.  They 
are  borne  singly  or  in  chains,  and  the  successive  places  on  the  hyplne 
where  they  were  attached  show  a  toothed  surface. 

The  fungus  has  been  found  by  the  author  several  times  in  different 
parts  of  Alabama,  and  specimens  have  been  received  from  Mississippi. 
It  is  not  of  very  common  appearance,  and  the  indications  are  that  it  is 
not  harmful,  though  it  is  sometimes  produced  in  considerable  profusion. 
It  probably  occurs  in  other  States  also.  It  was  first  discovered  in  the 
autumn  of  1889.1 

When  viewed  from  above  the  spots  present  a  light  yellowish  tint  in 
the  green  leaf.  Viewed  by  transmitted  light  tne  spots  are  paler  and 
permit  the  light  to  come  through  more  freely  than  through  the  other 
parts  of  the  leaf.  The  hyphae  are  usually  more  numerous  on  the  under- 
side of  the  leaf  and  sometimes  only  upon  this  side,  but  they  may  be 
borne  upon  both  sides  even  on  the  same  spot.  It  is  not  likely  to  become 
of  any  serious  importance. 

Literature. — "A  new  Karuularia  on  cotton,"  Bot.  Gaz.,  15  (1890),  p.  166.  Alabama 
College  Sta.  Bui.  41. 

COTTON-BOLL   ROT. 

(Bacillus  gossypinus  Stedman.) 

This  disease  was  first  described  by  J.  M.  Stedman.2  It  affects  the 
bolls,  seed,  and  lint.  Affected  bolls  were  first  received  from  Baldwin 
County,  Ala.,  in  August,  1893.  The  bolls  were  in  a  rotten  condi- 
tion and  contained  iusects  which  were  determined  as  Epurcca  (estiva, 
and  Carpophilm  mutilatus,  beetles  known  in  the  Southern  States,  Mex- 
ico, Central  and  South  America,  and  having  the  habit  of  feeding  upon 
decaying  and  injured  fruit  of  all  kinds,  and  sometimes  found  sucking 
the  sap  from  wounds  in  trees.  They  were  found  common  in  cotton 
bolls  and  in  heaps  of  decaying  cotton  seed.  They  were  thus  regarded 
as  not  having  any  connection  with  the  cause  of  the  disease. 

Saprophytic  fungi  and  in  some  cases  the  anthracnose  of  cotton  were 
found,  but  iu  bolls  that  were  only  slightly  diseased  no  fungus  was 
observed.  Pure  cultures  of  the  bacteria  inside  the  closed  bolls  were 
made  by  the  plate  method,  and  cultivations  were  started  on  gelatin 
and  agar. 

In  gelatin  in  four  days  the  bacteria  clouded  the  entire  mass,  giving 
it  a  greenish  color.  In  agar  the  growth  produced  a  milky  cloud  along 
the  entire  track  of  the  needle  path  and  over  the  surface  of  the  agar  as 
a  more  or  less  white,  semitransparent  glossy  growth.  Bolls  on  healthy 
cotton  plants  were  inoculated  with  the  bacteria  from  these  pure  cul- 
tures, and  in  all  cases  the  disease  appeared.  Other  bolls  punctured 
with  a  sterile  needle  remained  healthy  except  in  one  case,  where  the 

'Bot.  Gaz.,  15  (1890),p.  166.  -Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  55. 


DISEASES    OF   COTTON.  311 

decay  produced  was  different  from  that  characteristic  of  the  disease. 
This  rot  is  said  to  originate  within  the  boll,  and  is  not  apparent  until 
the  contents  of  the  boll  are  decayed,  when  the  carpels  show  signs  of 
tbe  -disease  in  places.  It  first  begins  as  a  small,  dark-brown  area 
involving  the  young  seed  at  the  point  near  the  peduncle.  If  it  begins 
some  time  before  the  maturity  of  the  boll,  the  entire  boll  will  rot  and 
not  open ;  but  it  may  begin  so  late  that  only  a  few  seed  and  a  small 
portion  of  the  lint  are  affected,  while  the  carpels  separate  and  the  lint 
may  be  exposed  and  gathered. 

Stedman  discusses  the  question  of  the  probable  means  of  entrance 
of  the  bacillus  into  the  interior  of  the  boll.  The  suggestion  that  the 
germs  may  in  the  ground  in  some  unexplained  way  make  their  entrance 
in  the  root  and  travel  up  the  stem  to  the  boll  is  made,  and  also  the 
question  of  entering  the  young  ovary  at  flowering  time,  when  the 
germs  may  be  distributed  to  the  ovaries  by  the  agency  of  insects.  The 
possibility  of  the  germs  being  in  the  seed  at  the  time  of  planting  is 
also  suggested,  and  plans  for  experiments  to  determine  the  manner  of 
infection  are  proposed.  The  organisms  would  not  induce  pathological 
conditions  when  introduced  to  any  other  part  of  the  plant,  although 
in  some  cases  they  were  able  to  live  for  some  time.  The  disease  is 
chiefly  confined  to  the  middle  and  top  crop,  first  manifesting  itself 
early  in  August. 

The  organism  is  a  short  straight  bacillus,  truncate  at  the  ends,  with 
slightly  rounded  corners,  1.5  pi  to  0.75  //.  It  is  usually  solitary,  some- 
times in  pairs,  and.  occasionally  in  chains  of  three  to  four.  It  stains 
readily  with  the  usual  aniline  colors,  is  aerobic,  nonliquefying,  motile, 
and  forms  spores,  though  the  latter  are  not  described. 

The  problem  of  the  entrance  of  the  organism  to  the  bolls  should  be 
investigated,  together  with  the  relation  of  the  plant  to  soil  and  climatic 
conditions  in  connection  with  the  disease;  also  its  possible  connection 
with  the  disease  called  "  trenching "  should  be  taken  into  account.  In 
this  disease  the  organism,  as  we  know,  travels  up  the  stem  through  the 
vascular  ducts,  and  aside  from  the  foliage  characteristics,  which  are 
usually  quite  marked,  many  of  the  bolls  are  affected,  and  the  rot  here 
begins  in  the  interior  of  the  boll  at  the  same  point  as  in  the  cotton-boll 
rot.  It  should  also  be  borne  in  mind  that  when  the  bolls  are  within  a 
few  weeks  of  maturity  they  are  in  one  sense  a  form  of  nutrient  medium 
for  even  saprophytic  fungi  and  bacteria  which  are  introduced  into  them, 
so  that  too  much  reliance  should  not  be  placed  upon  the  results  of  the 
inoculation  of  the  bolls  through  needle  punctures. 

ROOT    GALLS    OF    COTTON. 
(Heterodera  radicicola  (Greef.)  Muell.) 

The  roots  of  cotton  are  sometimes  affected  with  a  disease  caused  by 
a  nematode  worm,  which,  living  in  the  tissues,  causes  abnormal  growths 
termed  u  galls."    This  is  also  a  very  common  affection  of  many  other 


312 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


plants,  and  especially  in  gardens  throughout  the  South  and  in  green- 
houses in  the  North.  The  worm  is,  in  fact,  quite  genet-ally  distributed 
over  the  world. 

A  related  species,  Jleterodera  schachtii  Schmidt,  is  also  quite  common 
in  Europe,  affecting  especially  the  roots  of  sugar  beets,  and  its  life  his- 
tory has  been  well  worked  out  by  Strubell.1  Jleterodera  radicicola  was 
made  the  subject  of  investigation  by  Mueller,-  though  he  left  some 
important  points  undetermined. 

In  the  autumn  of  1889  a  paper  on  the  injuries  produced  by  this  worm 
was  published   by  the  United   States  Department   of  Agriculture/1 

Almost  immediately 
following  this  paper 
was  o n e  by  the 
writer4  (1889)  dealing 
with  the  life  history 
and  metamorphoses 
of  this  nematode  and 
the  injuries  produced 
by  it  upon  the  plants 
in  the  vicinity  of 
Auburn,  Ala.  In  the 
course  of  this  work 
some  points  in  the 
life  history  of  the 
worm  were  more  fully 
elucidated. 

The  females  are  of 
a  dull  white  or  yel- 
low color,  with  irreg- 
ularly oval  bodies 
from  0.25  mm.  to  0.5 
mm.  in  diameter. 
Th ey  are  usually 
quite  easily  differen- 
tiated when  mature 
from  the  tissue  of  the 
plant  in  which  they 
lie  when  the  gall  is  broken  open.  Usually  the  unaided  eye  can  also 
distinguish  the  head  end  projecting  as  a  minute  point  on  one  side, 


Fig.  8.— Root  galls. 


1  Untersuchungen  tiber  den  Bau  mid  die  Entwickelung  des  Riibenuematodeu.,  Het- 
erodera  schachtii  Schmidt  (Bibliotkeca  Zoologica.  Original  Abhandlungen  aus  dem 
Gesauimtgebiete  der  Zoologie,  R.  Leuckhart  uud  C.  Chun.  Heft  2),  Cassel,  1888. 

2Mittheilungea  iiber  unseren  Ktdturpflanzen  schiidliche,  das  Geschlecht  Heterodera 
bildenden  Wiirmer,  Laudw.  Jahrb.,  XIII,  1884. 

:i  The  root-knot  disease  of  the  peach,  orange,  and  other  plants  in  Florida,  J.  C. 
Neal.     (U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div.  Ent.  Bui.  20.) 

••Nematode  root  galls,  a  preliminary  report  upon  the  life  history  and  metamor- 
phoses of  a  root-gall  nematode,  etc.     Ala.  College  Sta.  Bui.  9. 


DISEASES    OF    COTTON.  313 

giving  to  the  object  the  appearance  of  a  minute  gourd  or  "crooked-neck 
squash,"  or  of  a  minute  inflated  bladder.  They  can  be  well  seen  with 
the  aid  of  a  small  hand  glass.  The  cephalic  portion  of  the  body  is 
cylindrical,  the  end  being  rounded;  the  mouth  is  terminal,  and  opens 
caudad  into  the  oesophagus  which  leads  to  the  intestine.  Lying  within 
the  mouth  is  a  spear,  slender  and  long-pointed  at  the  cephalic  extrem- 
ity, and  ending  in  a  three-lobed  knob  at  the  caudal  end.  It  is  capable 
of  extension,  being  moved  by  pairs  of  muscles  attached  directly  to  it. 
In  the  males  the  caudal  end  of  the  spear  is  supported  by  six  lamella?, 
the  ends  of  which  form  the  cephalic  end  of  the  head  and  fit  around  the 
spear.  The  oesophagus  begins  at  the  base  of  the  spear.  The  cephalic 
portion  is  a  long,  slender,  tortuous  channel,  which  appears  as  a  dark 
line,  reaching  to  near  the  swollen  part  of  the  cyst.  The  middle  portion 
of  the  oesophagus  is  an  ovoid  or  ellipsoidal  transparent,  muscular  bulb, 
which  has  a  fibrillate  structure,  the  fibrillar  radiating  from  the  center. 
The  caudal  portion  of  the  oesophagus  connects  with  the  intestine.  In 
the  gravid  females  this  is  difficult  to  see,  since  at  this  stage  the  mass 
of  fat  globules  renders  the  body  cavity  too  opaque. 

Were  it  not  for  a  slight  movement  of  the  apparatus  just  described  as 
the  spear  is  thrust  back  and  forth,  or  slight  movements  of  the  head, 
there  would  be  nothing  to  suggest  what  we  ordinarily  consider  a  sign 
of  life.  Occasionally  while  the  cyst  is  under  microscopic  examination 
the  spear  is  thrust  slowly  out  at  the  mouth  and  then  drawn  back.  At 
the  same  time  the  cephalic  part  of  the  oesophagus  connected  with  it  is 
also  moved.  Sometimes  the  apparatus  slides  far  enough  so  that  the 
tortuous  portion  of  the  oesophagus  is  straightened  and  the  bulb  is 
moved  a  little  forward  and  backward.  Sometimes  there  appears  also  a 
slight  lateral  motion  of  the  head,  a  sudden,  "jerky"  motion.  This  is 
probably  from  force  of  habit,  for  in  the  larval  stage  movement  from 
place  to  place  is  accomplished  by  a  constantly  changing,  tortuous 
motion  of  the  body.  Mueller  (loc.  cit.)  speaks  of  an  expansion  and  con- 
traction of  the  middle  part  of  the  oesophagus  which  he  has  observed. 
By  this  means  nutriment  from  the  plant  is  sucked  into  the  oesophagus 
and  thence  passed  to  the  intestine.  Within  the  vesicular  portion  of 
the  body,  frequently  more  or  less  obscured  by  the  mass  of  fat  globules, 
are  the  two  long  genital  tubes,  which  are  coiled  and  considerably 
longer  than  the  body.  The  genital  tubes  are  paired,  and  near  the 
caudal  portion  of  the  body  they  unite  into  a  common  tube,  which 
extends  to  the  exit,  the  vulva.  The  genital  tubes,  though  nearly  cylin- 
drical, are  composed  of  four  parts.  The  anterior  or  free  ends,  including 
about  one-third  the  length,  are  the  ovaries.  The  receptaculum  seminis 
is  near  the  center,  and  is  connected  with  the  ovaries  by  the  oviduct  and 
with  the  vulva  by  the  uterus. 

The  mature  male  is  nearly  cylindrical,  1  mm.  to  1.5  mm.  in  length  and 
about  43  ).i  broad  near  the  middle.  The  body  is  a  little  less  in  diameter 
at  the  caudal  end,  and  the  cephalic  half  tapers  very  slightly  to  the 
head  end,  which  is  about  half  the  diameter  of  the  middle  of  the  body. 


314  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

The  body  is  beautifully  marked  by  prominent  transverse  striae,  broader 
and  much  more  distinct  than  in  the  larval  stage.  The  excretory  canal 
opens  on  the  ventral  side  a  little  caudad  to  the  muscular  bulb.  The 
caudal  end  of  the  body  is  curved,  and  near  it  are  the  two  spicules  at 
the  opening  of  the  cloaca.  The  generative  organ  is  paired.  The  long 
slender  testes,  lying  on  either  side  of  the  intestine,  reach  by  their  free 
cephalic  ends  to  about  the  middle  portion  of  the  body.  Some  little 
distance  from  the  caudal  end  of  the  body  they  unite  into  a  common 
canal,  which  itself,  near  the  spicules,  unites  with  the  intestine  to  form 
the  cloaca.  The  spermatozoa  are  spherical.  The  cellular  structure  of 
the  testes  resembles  to  a  certain  extent  that  of  the  ovaries.  The  cells  are 
polyhedral  from  mutual  pressure.  In  living  males  the  spherical  sperma- 
tozoa are  easily  seen  at  or  near  the  common  passage,  but  they  are 
developed  in  the  caudal  ends  of  the  testes. 

By  boiling  infested  potatoes  so  that  the  worms  could  be  removed 
easily  from  the  softened  tissues  without  cutting  or  crushing  them  it 
was  found  that  it  toughened  the  tissues  of  the  animals  and  made  the 
cellular  structure  of  the  testes,  by  coagulation  of  the  albuminous 
substances,  very  distinct. 

DEVELOPMENT  AND  METAMORPHOSES. 

Eggs. — The  young  ova  are  developed  in  great  numbers  in  the  ovaries, 
and  when  full  grown  the  genital  tubes  are  crowded  for  nearly  their 
entire  length.  They  are  very  plastic;  when  free  are  spherical,  but 
crowded  in  the  ovaries  are  polygonal.  Each  one  presents  a  large 
nucleus  and  distinct  nucleolus.  When  quite  young  they  are  nearly 
hyaline  and  transparent.  Near  the  cephalic  end  of  the  ovaries  there 
are  several  layers  of  them  because  they  are  quite  small,  but  as  they 
grow  in  size  and  pass  down  the  ovaries  to  the  oviduct  and  receptaculum 
seminis  they  become  elongated  and  a  single  one  completely  fills  the 
transverse  diameter  of  the  duct,  and  its  length  is  twice  the  diameter. 
The  mature  egg  is  80  /.i  to  100  j.i  long.  The  ends  are  rounded,  and  the 
form  is  somewhat  curved  so  that  it  resembles  a  bean.  The  protoplasm 
in  the  young  and  transparent  egg  gradually  becomes  granular,  and  in 
the  mature  eggs  the  coarse  granules  and  fat  globules  are  so  numerous 
that  the  egg  becomes  opaque  aud  the  nucleus  is  seen  with  difficulty. 

After  the  eggs  are  fertilized  in  the  receptaculum  seminis  they  move 
on  toward  the  uterus  aud  vulva,  but  it  is  very  rare  that  they  escape 
from  the  body  of  the  cyst,  since  that  is  usually  inclosed  on  all  sides  by 
the  surrounding  tissue.  The  uterus  becomes  ruptured  and  the  eggs 
become  free  within  the  body  cavity.  Segmentation  of  the  egg  fre- 
quently begins  before  the  egg  escapes  from  the  uterus.  The  eggs  may 
be  found  in  several  stages  of  segmentation  while  still  within  the  uterus. 
The  first  division  is  usually  such  that  the  egg  is  divided  into  two 
unequal  cells,  though  the  difference  is  not  very  great.  From  this  time 
the  segmentation  is  somewhat  unequal.     These  two  primary  unequal 


DISEASES    OF    COTTON.  315 

cells  represent  the  mother  cells  of  two  different  groups  of  cells.  The 
larger  cell  divides  more  rapidly  and  forms  small  cells  which  completely 
surround  the  group  of  larger  cells  that  result  from  the  slower  segmen- 
tation of  the  smaller  primary  cell.  The  growing  over  of  these  smaller 
cells  proceeds  first  down  the  convex  side  of  the  egg.  This  ectoderm 
layer  of  cells  folds  over  the  opposite  end  of  the  embryo,  the  endoderm 
cells.  Thus  the  prostom  is  upon  the  ventral  side  of  the  egg — that  is, 
the  concave  side — because  the  ectoderm  cells  on  the  concave  side  of  the 
egg  have  grown  but  little.  If  at  this  stage  we  turn  the  egg  so  that  we 
are  looking  directly  at  the  concave  side,  the  ectoderm  cells  will  be  in  a 
boat-shaped  mass,  and  within  this  are  the  endoderm  cells.  The  pros- 
torn  now  begins  to  close  by  the  growth  and  increase  of  the  cells  at  the 
margin.  This  closure  takes  place  more  rapidly  at  the  caudal  end  and 
advances  toward  the  cephalic  end,  so  that  there  is  finally  only  a  small 
opening  through  the  ectoderm  near  the  cephalic  end  on  the  ventral 
side.  This  at  last  becomes  completely  closed.  Invagination  now  takes 
place  at  the  cephalic  end,  and  the  mouth  and  oesophagus  are  developed. 
Some  of  these  phases  can  be  seen  while  the  embryo  is  still  of  the  same 
length  as  the  egg,  but  it  soou  begins  to  elongate  and  becomes  more 
slender,  and  at  the  same  time  coils  around  within  the  egg.  Eventually 
it  is  coiled  three  or  four  times.  When  it  reaches  this  stage  it  remains 
a  day  or  two  within  the  eggshell,  when  by  writhing  and  twisting  the 
egg  membrane  is  ruptured  and  the  embryo  escapes.  In  doing  so  it 
molts  for  the  first  time. 

Larval  stage. — The  larva  is  300  /*  to  400  jj.  long;  it  tapers  gently  to 
the  cephalic  end  and  gradually  into  the  pointed  caudal  end.  In  this 
form  it  resembles  what  are  called  "vinegar  eels."  The  larva?  at  the 
time  of  hatching  are  inclosed  usually  by  the  surrounding  tissue  in 
which  the  female  cyst  was  inclosed.  They  make  their  escape  either 
by  the  decay  and  disintegration  of  the  tissues  or  by  battering  a  place 
of  escape  with  the  use  of  their  spear.  With  the  spear  they  also  now 
gain  an  entrance  into  fresh  and  uninjured  portions  of  the  roots.  The 
plant  not  being  able  to  expel  the  invader  bends  its  energies  to  the  repair 
of  the  injury,  and  the  result  is  the  formation  of  a  gall,  by  the  increase 
of  the  cells  at  the  injured  part,  all  of  which  lessens  the  energies  of  the 
plant  normally  directed  to  the  production  of  leaf  and  fruit.  The  larva? 
wander  through  the  tissue  for  a  time,  when  they  molt  again  and  pass 
into  the  cystic  state. 

Cystic  state. — The  larva?  locate  at  various  depths  in  the  tissues,  and 
the  body  now  begins  to  enlarge  or  "swell  "up,  except  at  the  ends. 
Almost  before  any  increase  in  the  size  of  the  body  takes  place  it 
becomes  rigid  so  far  as  any  voluntary  motion  of  any  considerable  extent 
is  concerned.  It  may  be  twisted  or  turned  in  very  curious  forms  when 
this  rigidity  comes  upon  it.  The  enlargement  begins  close  behind  the 
muscular  bulb  of  the  oesophagus,  and  for  a  little  time  this  part  of  the 
body  is  a  little  larger  than  the  caudal  part.    Very  soon  the  enlargement 


316  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

takes  place  all  along  the  body  as  far  as  the  anus  at  the  hyaline  por- 
tion, some  little  distance  from  the  pointed  end  of  the  tail.  The  cyst  is 
at  tirst  irregularly  spindle-shaped,  then  clavate  with  a  sharply  pointed 
process,  the  tail,  at  the  larger  end.  Up  to  this  time  it  is  very  difficult 
to  distinguish  the  sexes,  but  from  this  point  they  strongly  diverge. 
The  female  cyst  continues  to  enlarge  until  it  readies  the  vesicular 
form  which  it  possesses  at  maturity,  while  the  male  undergoes  a  second 
transformation  and  returns  to  the  thread-like  or  anguillula  form. 

Transformation  of  the  male. — The  body  of  the  male  at  this  time  is 
of  the  same  size  as  that  of  the  cyst,  very  stout  in  proportion  to  its 
length.  The  first  sign  of  the  transformation  is  the  slipping  of  the  head 
from  this  end  of  the  cyst.  At  the  same  time  the  thick  body  begins  to 
elongate,  narrow,  and  double  up  within  the  cyst  wall.  This  is  the 
third  molt,  and  while  it  is  undergoing  this  change  it  molts  again, 
making  four  in  all.  The  male  continues  to  elongate  until  it  is  coiled 
three,  four,  or  more  times  within  the  cyst,  according  to  the  length  of 
the  latter,  which  retains  perfectly  its  former  shape.  During  this  trans- 
formation the  sexual  organs  of  the  male  have  matured.  It  now  breaks 
through  the  wall  of  the  cyst  and  travels  through  the  tissues  until  it 
reaches  a  female,  when  fertilization  takes  place,  after  which  the  male 
soon  dies. 

A  life  cycle  of  the  worm  is  completed  in  about  one  month.  Therefore 
in  favorable  seasons  there  would  be  seven  or  eight  successive  genera- 
tions in  a  single  year.  When  we  consider  the  number  of  eggs  each 
female  is  capable  of  producing  (from  100  to  200),  it  will  be  seen  that 
the  worms  must  multiply  with  startling  rapidity.  The  periods  of  trans- 
formation of  different  individuals  do  not  altogether  coincide,  so  that  at 
almost  any  season  we  may  find  worms  in  all  stages  of  development. 

The  injuries  produced  by  the  presence  of  the  worm  cause  distortions 
of  the  tissue  elements,  and  in  many  cases  so  devitalize  the  tissues  that 
putrefactive  organisms  set  to  work  and  produce  extensive  diseased 
areas.  The  large  amount  of  nutriment  taken  also  by  the  roots  in  the 
development  of  the  galls  lessens  the  product  of  the  plant.  The  great- 
est injury  to  cotton,  however,  seems  to  appear  when  the  disease  is 
accompanied  with  the  "  frenching"  organism  (see  p.  290).  Great  care 
should  be  used  in  transferring  rooted  plants  which  are  liable  to  be 
affected  by  the  nematode  from  one  place  to  another. 

Occasionally  some  males  were  found  which  showed  but  a  single  testis. 
Since  Heterodera  schaehtii  possesses  but  a  single  testis,  it  might  be  well 
to  inquire  whether  that  species  were  also  present  and  whether  they  are 
associated  in  the  same  roots  in  some  cases  or  whether  there  is  a  varia- 
tion in  U.  radicicola  in  the  possession  of  paired  and  single  testes.  This, 
however,  must  be  left  to  future  investigators. 


THE  INSECTS  WHICH  AFFECT  THE  COTTON  PLANT  IN 
THE  UNITED  STATES. 

By  L.  O.  Howard,  Ph.  D. 
Entomologist,  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture.         * 

The  cultivation  of  cotton  in  the  United  States  has  gone  through  a 
curious  change  with  regard  to  the  depredations  of  insects.  Kot  very 
long  ago,  according  to  statistics  published  by  this  Department,  the 
average  annual  loss  to  the  cotton  growers  from  the  work  of  a  single 
species  of  insect  amounted  to  815,000,000,  while  in  such  seasons  as 
that  of  186S  and  that  of  1S73  the  loss  far  exceeded  this  amount.  This 
insect  was  the  so-called  cotton  caterpillar,  or  cotton  army  worm,  or 
chenille,  or  cotton-leaf  worm  (the  larva  of  Aletia  argillacea  Hiibn.). 
Down  to  the  year  1881  the  damage  done  by  this  insect  so  far  exceeded 
that  inflicted  by  any  other  species  that  other  forms  had  received  but 
little  consideration. 

With  the  rapid  extension  of  cotton  culture  in  Texas,  however,  the 
so-called  bollworm  (the  larva  of  Heliothis  armujer  Hiibn.)  became  a 
very  prominent  factor  in  the  cultivation  of  the  crop.  This  insect  had 
always  been  known  as  an  enemy  of  cotton  in  the  other  States,  but  the 
damage  which  it  accomplished  was  greatly  inferior  to  that  of  the  cot- 
ton-leaf worm.  Texas,  however,  speedily  became  noted  for  bollworm 
damage,  and  as  early  as  1879  this  insect  was  recognized  as  the  chief 
depredator  on  cotton. 

The  subject  of  the  cotton  worm  attracted  very  considerable  atten- 
tion at  au  early  date.  Southern  newspapers  and  magazines  contained 
many  articles,  of  which  those  by  Dr.  D.  B.  Gorhain,  Mr.  Thomas  Affleck, 
Dr.  D.  L.  Phares,  and  Mr.  William  Jones  are  the  most  important. 
Mr.  Townend  Glover,  the  first  entomologist  to  this  Department,  inves- 
tigated the  subject  of  the  cotton  worm  in  the  fifties,  and,  in  fact,  the 
literature  of  the  subject  increased  very  rapidly  after  the  destructive 
year  1817. 

After  the  close  of  the  civil  war  a  series  of  cotton- worm  years  fol- 
lowed, unfortunately  just  at  the  period  when  the  loss  of  a  part  of  the 
crop  meant  more  to  the  people  of  the  South  than  had  been  the  case 
at  any  previous  time.  This  attracted  investigation  to  the  subject, 
and  it  was  not  long  before  the  use  of  paris  green  upon  the  crop  was 
suggested,  probably  in  the  first  place  by  Prof.  C.  V.  Eiley,  at  that  time 
entomologist  to  the  State  of  Missouri.  It  was  later  advocated  by  Mr. 
Glover,  representing  this  Department,  and  circulars  were  sent  out  from 

317 


318  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

the  Department  in  the  year  1873,  urging  the  use  of  this  arsenical  poison 
upon  the  crop. 

After  the  conclusion  of  the  work  of  the  United  States  Entomological 
Commission  on  the  Migratory  Locust,  or  "Hateful  Grasshopper"  of  the 
West,  the  most  prominent  and  destructive  insect  in  tbe  country  de- 
manding investigation  seemed  to  be  the  cotton  worm.  Under  appro- 
priations from  Congress  the  investigation  of  this  insect  was  carried  out 
by  the  United  States  Entomological  Commission  and  the  Division  of 
Entomology  of  this  Department,  working  independently.1 

At  just  about  the  time  when  the  commission  finished  its  labors  upon 
this  insect  the  insect  itself  ceased  to  be  a  serious  enemy  to  cotton. 
Since  that  season  the  damage  which  it  has  done  has  been  compara- 
tively small,  and  at  the  present  time  the  cotton  worm  is  not  feared  by 
planters.  That  this  state  of  affairs  is  due  in  part  to  the  work  of  the 
official  investigations  can  not  be  doubted,  but  to  claim  that  it  is  due 
entirely  to  this  work  would  not  be  justified.  The  widely  disseminated 
knowledge  of  the  life  history  of  the  insect  and  the  consequent  general 
adoption  of  the  plan  of  early  poisoning  (i.  e.,  before  the  destructive 
third  generation  of  the  caterpillars  has  made  its  appearance)  in  the 
more  southern  portions  of  the  cotton  belt  have  had  much  to  do  with 
the  recent  comparative  immunity;  but  aside  from  this,  the  cotton  worm 
is  undoubtedly  much  less  abundant  and  destructive  than  it  was  fifteen 
years  ago,  and  as  a  consequence  it  no  longer  holds  the  first  position 
among  the  insect  enemies  of  the  cotton  crop. 

With  the  bollworm,  however,  we  find  a  different  state  of  affairs. 
This  insect,  as  will  be  shown  in  a  later  portion  of  this  article,  does  not 
depend  upon  cotton  alone  for  its  existence.  It  feeds  upon  many  differ- 
ent plants.  The  cultural  methods  in  vogue  all  through  the  South  are 
peculiarly  favorable  to  its  development,  and  it  is,  moreover,  a  hardy 
insect,  with  comparatively  few  natural  enemies.  Further,  it  feeds  for 
the  greater  part  of  its  existence  protected  by  some  portion  of  the  plant 
which  it  infests,  and  in  a  solitary  way,  so  that  it  is  not  subject  to  the 
contagious  diseases  which  are  so  fatal  to  many  injurious  insects  of 
gregarious  habit.  This  latter  cause  also  operates  against  successful 
treatment,  and  the  result  is  that  bollworm  damage  has  not  diminished, 
but  in  fact  has  increased  in  many  portions  of  our  cotton-gro wing- 
territory. 

■The  results  of  these  investigations  are  contained  in  three  volumes:  The  first  is  a 
144-page  pamphlet  published  as  Bui.  No.  3  of  the  Entomological  Commission,  Janu- 
ary 28,  1880;  the  second  a  500-page  volume  issued  by  the  Department  of  Agriculture 
and  entitled  "Report  upon  Cotton  Insects,"  etc.,  by  J.  Henry  Conistock,  submitted 
November,  1879;  the  third,  the  "Fourth  Report  of  the  United  States  Entomological 
Commission,"  by  C.  V.  Riley,  published  in  1885,  a  bulky  volume  of  about  600  pages, 
illustrated  by  64  plates  and  numerous  text  figures.  Although  its  last  report  was  not 
published  until  1885,  the  work  of  the  commission  was  practically  completed  with 
the  year  1881.  Copies  of  this  report  may  still  be  obtained  through  Members  of 
Congress. 


INSECTS  WHICH  AFFECT  THE  COTTON  PLANT.       319 

As  shown  above,  the  bollworm  was  incidentally  studied  during  the 
Government  investigation  of  the  cotton  worm.  Its  life  history  was 
completely  made  out,  and  fairly  satisfactory  remedies  were  discovered 
and  displayed  in  Comstock's  report  on  cotton  insects  and  in  the  Fourth 
Report  of  the  Entomological  Commission.  JSTo  general  adoption  of  these 
remedies  resulted,  however,  and  as  a  general  thing  planters  either 
undertook  no  remedial  work  whatsoever,  or  relied  upon  such  exploded 
remedies  as  the  use  of  trap  lanterns  and  poisoned  bait.  As  a  result  of 
the  continued  damage  done  by  this  species,  Congress  provided,  in  the 
appropriation  bill  for  the  fiscal  year  1890-91,  for  a  supplementary 
investigation  by  the  Division  of  Entomology  of  this  Department.  At 
that  time  considerable  attention  was  being  given  to  the  subject  of  con- 
tagious diseases  of  insects,  and  the  Entomologist  was  instructed  to 
conduct  a  thorough  series  of  experiments  in  the  direction  of  the  prac- 
tical use  of  some  such  disease  as  applied  to  this  insect.  The  work  of 
a  season  in  the  field  by  an  assistant  in  the  division,  F.  W.  Mally,  who 
was  helped  by  Dr.  A.  R.  Booth,  of  Vicksburg,  and  by  Mr.  Nathan 
Banks,  of  the  office  force,  resulted  in  the  publication  of  Bulletin  24  of 
the  division,  in  which  it  is  shown  that  the  best  dependence  of  the  cot- 
ton grower  is  upon  the  remedies  recommended  in  the  Fourth  Report  of 
the  Entomological  Commission,  and  that  nothing  practical  is  to  be 
hoped  for  in  the  way  of  the  encouragement  of  any  disease.  Congress 
renewed  the  appropriation  the  following  year,  and  Mr.  Mally  continued 
his  work.  The  results  are  summarized  in  Bulletin  29  of  the  division, 
which  is  entitled,  "  Report  on  the  Bollworm  of  Cotton,"  and  which  was 
published  iu  the  spring  of  1893.  It  is  a  pamphlet  of  73  pages,  and  con- 
tains a  number  of  new  but  comparatively  unimportant  facts  relative 
to  the  economy  of  the  insect  and  the  details  of  the  experimental  work. 
No  new  remedies  of  value  were  brought  out. 

Aside  from  the  cotton  worm  and  the  bollworm,  the  cotton  plant  can 
not  be  said  to  suffer  seriously  from  the  attacks  of  insects.  Cutworms 
sometimes  damage  the  young  plants  in  the  beginning  of  the  season; 
plant  lice  occasionally  cause  the  withering  of  the  terminal  leaves  (also 
usually  early  in  the  season);  there  are  several  bugs  which  sting  the 
young  bolls,  although  never  to  any  serious  extent;  grasshoppers  some- 
times "rag"  the  leaves  in  Texas,  and  there  are  several  leaf  feeding  cat- 
erpillars which  appear  later  in  the  season,  and  in  reality  do  little  but 
remove  the  superabundant  foliage  and  expose  the  bolls  to  the  sun, 
causing  earlier  ripening,  and  consequently  a  beneficial  rather  than  an 
injurious  effect.  We  occasionally  learn  of  a  case  of  local  and  tempo- 
rary damage  by  one  or  another  of  several  species  of  insects,  such  as 
the  garden  webworm,  which  injured  young  cotton  growing  in  proxim- 
ity to  garden  crops  in  Texas,  Arkansas,  and  Indian  Territory  a  few 
years  ago ;  but  these  cases  are  rare,  and  do  not  deserve  extended  con- 
sideration. 

A  serious  exception  to  this  general  statement  may  in  the  future  be 


320  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

found  in  Anthonomus  grandis,  a  Mexican  weevil  which  damages  cotton 
bolls.  This  insect,  down  to  the  close  of  the  season  of  1894,  was  known 
to  us  only  through  a  few  specimens  collected  upon  cotton  bolls  in  Mex- 
ico some  ten  years  since  by  Dr.  Edward  Palmer.  During  1894,  how- 
ever, we  learned  that  the  species  had  made  its  appearance  in  the  State 
of  Texas.  It  works  in  a  peculiarly  injurious  manner,  utterly  destroying 
many  bolls.  The  life  history  of  the  species  was  carefully  investigated 
during  1S95,  and  the  writer  has  published  two  circulars  of  information, 
which  have  been  widely  distributed  among  cotton  planters.1 

After  tins  brief  summary  it  will  be  evident  that  the  subject  of  insects 
injurious  to  cotton  in  the  United  States  will  be  most  conveniently  han- 
dled under  four  main  headings — (1)  the  cotton  worm,  (2)  the  bollworm, 
(3)  the  Mexican  cotton-boll  weevil,  and  (4)  other  cotton  insects. 

THE  COTTON  WORM,  OR  COTTON  CATERPILLAR. 

(Aletia  argillacea  Hiibn.) 

GENERAL   APPEARANCE,    HABITS,    AND    LIFE    HISTORY. 

This  insect  is  perfectly  familiar  to  all  cotton  growers.  The  slender, 
bluish-green  caterpillar  with  small  black  spots,  and  often  with  black 
stripes  down  its  back,  which  loops  when  it  walks  and  feeds  voraciously 
on  both  upper  and  under  surfaces  of  the  cotton  leaf,  is  to  be  found  in 
cotton  fields  in  the  Gulf  States  all  through  the  summer.  It  is  gen- 
erally not  noticed  in  the  early  part  of  the  season  on  account  of  its  insig. 
nificant  numbers.  Later,  through  the  ragging  of  the  leaves,  it  becomes 
noticeable,  and  in  seasons  of  abundance  the  plant  is  entirely  defoli- 
ated. Farther  north  the  insect  makes  its  appearance  at  a  later  date  in 
the  season,  and  there  the  caterpillars  are  not  the  offspring  of  hibernat- 
ing moths,  but  ot  the  moths  of  the  first  or  second  generation,  which 
have  developed  in  more  southern  cotton  fields  and  have  flown  north 
with  the  prevailing  southern  winds.  Late  in  the  season  moths  of  the 
fourth  or  fifth  generation  fly  far  to  the  north,  frequently  making  their 
appearance  in  numbers  about  electric  lights  in  Canada  There  is  no 
absolute  evidence  of  any  other  food  plant  than  cotton,  although  many 
entomologists  have  surmised  that  the  species  has  a  northern  food  plant. 
The  specimens  seen  in  Canada  have,  however,  in  all  probability  flown 
north  from  cotton  fields  in  the  Carolinas,  and  perhaps  even  farther 
south. 

The  egg. — The  egg  is  bluish  green  in  color  and  of  a  different  shade 
from  that  of  the  leaf,  so  that  it  can  be  rather  readily  distinguished.  It 
is  flattened-convex  in  shape,  with  many  parallel  longitudinal  ridges  con- 
verging at  the  center  above.  It  is  found  usually  on  the  underside  of 
the  leaves  and  as  a  general  thing  toward  the  top  of  the  plant.  In  the 
neighborhood  of  500  eggs  are  laid  by  each  female,  sometimes  several 
upon  one  leaf,  but  never  in  clusters.  The  eggs  are  laid  at  night,  since 
the  moth  is  a  night  flyer.  The  duration  of  the  egg  state  A'aries  some- 
what, according  to  the  season.     In  midsummer  the  larva  hatches  in 


1  U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div.  of  Ent.  Circ.  6  and  14,  n.  ser. 


INSECTS  WHICH  AFFECT  THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


321 


Fig.  9.-Eg° 
a,  top  view 


of  cotton  worm  moth: 
6,  side  view — greatly  en- 
larged (from  Fourth  Report  U.  S. 
Entomological  Commission). 


Before  reaching- full  growth 


from  three  to  four  days  after  the  egg  is  laid,  but  iu  spring  and  autumn 
this  period  is  very  considerably  lengthened. 

The  larva. — After  hatching  from  the  egg,  the  young  larva  feeds  at 
first  upon  the  underside  of  the  leaf,  devouring  simply  the  lower  paren- 
chyma and  not  piercing  through  to  the 
upper  side  until  after  the  first  molt.  At 
first  the  larva  is  pale  yellow  in  color,  soon 
becoming  greenish.  The  dark  spots  be- 
come more  or  less  conspicuous  after  the 
first  molt,  and  the  characteristic  markings, 
as  shown  in  the  figure,  make  their  first 
appearance.  After  the  second  molt  these 
markings  become  more  conspicuous,  and 
the  insect  takes  on  a  distinctly  greenish 
color,  the  black  along  the  back  varying 
among  different  individuals  iu  its  intensity 
the  caterpillar  sheds  its  skin  five  times,  and  the  duration  of  the  cater- 
pillar stage  is  from  one  to  three  weeks.  Early  in  the  season  the  green 
color  appears  to  predominate,  while  toward  the  fall  the  blackish  cater- 
pillars are  more  abundant,  although  at  any 
time  during  the  season  green  and  dark 
worms  are  seen  together.  Although  the 
normal  food  of  the  caterpillar  is  the  leaves, 
it  will  frequently  gnaw  the  tender  twigs  and 
will  even  damage  the  bolls  by  eating  into 
them  in  spots.  This,  however,  generally 
occurs  only  when  the  worms  are  present  in 
exceptional  numbers  and  the  supply  of 
leaves  becomes  exhausted.  We  have  re- 
ferred to  the  fact  that  the  caterpillar  is  a 
looper,  i.  e.,  that  it  walks  by  bringing  its 
hind  prop  legs  up  to  the  true  legs,  causing 
its  back  to  arch  up  in  a  loop.  Like  the  true 
loopers,  or  measuring  worms,  it  has  the  habit 
of  jerking  itself  some  little  distance  when 
disturbed,  and  when  it  falls  it  usually  sup- 
ports itself  by  a  silken  thread.  It  is  some- 
thing of  a  cannibal,  and  when  other  food 
fails,  or  even  rarely  when  leaves  are  abun- 
dant, it  will  feed  upon  smaller  and  feebler 
individuals  of  its  own  kind.  In  spite  of 
its  comparatively  small  size  and  slender 
form,  this  larva  is,  in  fact,  very  voracious,  and  when  occurring  in  num- 
bers the  ruin  which  it  accomplishes  is  complete. 

The  chrysalis  or  pupa. — The  caterpillar,  having  become  full  grown, 
never  enters  the  ground  to  transform,  although  many  planters  have 
believed  that  this  is  the.  manner  in  which  the  insect  passes  the  winter. 
1993— No.  33 21 


b 

Fig.  10.— Cotton  caterpillar:  a,  from 
side,  6,  from  above — twice  natural 
size  (from  Fourth  Report  TJ.  S. 
Entomological  Commission). 


322 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


Ci  i    b 

Fig.  11. — Cotton  worm  moth:  a,  with  wings  expanded  in 
flight ;  l>,  wings  closed,  at  rest — natural  size  (after  Riley). 


It  spins  a  light  silken  web,  forming  an  imperfect  cocoon,  usually  within 
a  folded  leaf.  It  is  frequently  seen  hanging  quite  naked  upon  the 
plant,  but  in  such  cases  the  leaf  in  which  it  was  originally  spun  has 
been  eaten  away  by  other  caterpillars.  Its  color  is  at  first  green,  but  in 
the  course  of  an  hour  or  so  it  changes  to  brown.  The  insect  remains 
in  this  condition  for  a  period  varying  from  one  week  to  thirty  days. 

The  adult  insect.— The  perfect  insect  or  imago  of  the  cotton  caterpillar 
is  a  rather  small  moth  of  an  olive-gray  color,  sometimes  with  a  some- 
what purplish  luster.  Its 
wings  expand  from  ]i  to  \l 
inches.  The  markings  of  the 
wings  are  indicated  in  the 
figure.  The  moth  is  a  night 
flyer  and  hides  during  the 
day,  starting  up  and  flying 
with  a  swift,  somewhat  dart- 
ing motion  when  disturbed. 
After  sunset  it  takes  wing 
and  flies  about,  laying  its  eggs  or  searching  for  food.  It  feeds,  in 
fact,  rather  extensively,  frequenting  neighboring  flowering  plants  and 
also  the  nectar  glands  of  the  leaves  of  cotton.  Fruit,  as  it  ripens,  also 
attracts  these  moths,  and  is  frequently  seriously  injured  by  them.  The 
tongue  or  proboscis  of  the  moth  is  curiously  modified  and  fitted  for 
piercing  the  skin  and  tissues  of  ripe  fruit,  as  is  shown  in  the  figure.  It 
is  said  that  they  are  able  to  puncture  hard  green  pears,  the  effect  of 
the  puncture  being  a  discoloration  of  the  skin  for  some  distance  around. 
The  female  begins  to  lay  her 
eggs  in  from  two  to  four 
days  after  lea  vingthechrys- 
alis,  and  each  individual 
lays  from  300  to  GOO  eggs. 
With  five  consecutive  and 
rapidly  developed  genera- 
tions the  occasionally  extra- 
ordinary numbers  of  the 
late  broods  are  not  to  be 
wondered  at. 

Number  of  broods  or  generations. — The  observations  of  Mr.  Schwarz 
in  South  Texas  in  1879  show  that  at  least  seven,  and  probably  even 
more,  generations  are  produced  there.  Fully  as  many  probably  develop 
in  Florida.  The  general  belief  in  the  South  up  to  the  time  of  the 
beginning  of  the  cotton-worm  investigation  was  that  there  were  three 
generations  only,  since  three  "crops"  of  worms  only  were  customarily 
observed.  The  early  generations,  however,  were  overlooked  on  account 
of  their  small  numbers,  and,  in  fact,  in  the  northern  portions  of 
the  cotton  belt,  the  general  idea  was  correct  enough,  since  northward- 
flying  moths  in  general  do  not  oviposit  in  fields  in  this  region  until 


FlG.  12. — Prohoscis  of  cotton  worm  moth— enlarged;  tip  at 
right  still  more  enlarged  (from  Comstock's  report  on  cot- 
ton insects). 


INSECTS  WHICH  AFFECT  THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


323 


comparatively  late  in  the  season.  The  moths  hibernate,  only  in  the 
extreme  southern  portions  of  the  cotton  belt,  as  will  be  shown  in  the  next 
section,  and  begin  to  lay  their  eggs  as  early  as  March,  or  perhaps  even 
earlier,  in  South  Texas  and  Florida.  Two  generations  are  rapidly 
developed,  and  then,  in  these  localities,  a  confusion  of  generations  com- 
mences on  account  of  the  retardation  of  development  in  certain  indi- 
viduals and  acceleration  in  certain  others.  Moths  from  the  end  of 
March  on  are  constantly  Hying  out  from  these  points  and,  carried  by 
the  prevailing  southerly  winds,  settle  in  more  northern  fields  and  stock 
a  certain  number  of  plants  with  eggs.  Moths' developing  from  cater- 
pillars hatching  from  these  eggs  in  turn  stock  the  fields  in  which  they 
have  developed  with  a  greater  number  of  eggs,  and  a  certain  proportion 
of  them  fly  farther  north.  In  this  way  there  is  a  progressive  develop- 
ment all  through  the  cotton  belt  and  a  somewhat  varying  number  of 
generations  in  different  localities.  Under  certain  conditions,  however, 
such  as  the  early  development 
of  a  very  large  brood  in  the 
far  South,  so  many  moths  may 
be  developed  that  there  is  a 
nearly  simultaneous  stocking 
of  a  very  extensive  region. 

The  importance  of  ascer- 
taining the  early  presence  of 
the  worms,  although  in  small 
numbers,  from  a  remedial  point 
of  view  is  very  great,  and  since 
it  was  conclusively  shown  that 
worms  may  be  found  in  the 
fields  in  the  Gulf  States  long 
before  the  so-called  "  first 
crop,"  planters  have  looked 
for  them  more  carefully,  and 
doubtless  in  many  cases  pos- 
sibly severe  injury  has  been  prevented  by  the  poisoning  of  early  worms. 

The  moths  of  the  last  generation  in  seasons  of  cotton-worm  abun- 
dance frerruently  make  their  appearance  in  numbers  far  North.  The 
moth  is  a  very  strong  flyer,  and,  aided  by  the  wind,  has  been  known 
to  occur  abundantly  in  Canada,  and  has  been  observed  in  numbers  far 
out  at  sea.  During  September  it  has  been  known  to  do  very  consider- 
able injury  to  peaches  in  Kansas  and  to  ruin  acres  of  cantaloupes  as 
far  north  as  Racine,  Wis. 

Method  of  passing  the  winter. — The  greatest  difficulty  was  found  in 
settling  the  question  as  to  the  manner  in  which  this  insect  passes  the 
winter,  but  it  has  finally  been  established  that  over  the  more  northern 
portion  of  the  cotton  belt  the  species  dies  out  every  year,  while  in  the 
more  southern  portions  the  moth  hibernates  and  remains  torpid  in 
sheltered  situations.  There  must  also  have  been  occasionally  an  ingress 
of  moths  from  outside  of  the  United  States,  say  from  the  West  Indies 


Fig.  13.— Cotton  worm  egg  parasite  (Triehogramma  pre- 
tiosa):  a,  adult  female,  greatly  enlarged;  b,  ovipositor; 
c.  female  antenna  ;  d,  male  antenna,  still  more  enlarged 
(from  Fourth  Report  U.  S.  Entomological  Commission). 


324 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


Fig.  14. — Ohalcis  flavipes,  an  im- 
portant parasite  of  the  cotton 
caterpillar  (froni  Fourth  Report 
TJ.  S.  Entomological  Commis- 
sion) . 


or  from  Mexico  or  Central  America.  It  was  undoubtedly  in  this  way 
that  the  species  was  first  introduced  into  the  United  States,  and  such 
immigrations  were  probably  of  frequent  occurrence  down  to  compara- 
tively recent  years.  Professor  Riley,  writing  in  1882,  concluded  that 
there  is  nothing  more  fully  established  than  that  the  moth  hibernates 
principally  under  the  shelter  of  rank  wire  grass  in  the  more  heavily 

timbered  portions  of  the  South,  and  that  these 
moths  begin  laying  on  the  rattoon  cotton  when 
it  is  only  an  inch  or  so  high.     Only  the  excep- 
\  \  tional  few  survive,  and  this  survival  seems  to 

be  more  common  in  the  western  part  of  the 
cotton  belt  than  in  the  Atlantic  States. 

PARASITES   AND   NATURAL   ENEMIES. 

In  the  report  by  Professor  Comstock,  pub- 
lished in  1880,  and  in  the  Fourth  Report  of 
the  United  States  Entomological  Commission 
much  space  is  devoted  to  the  subject  of  the 
natural  enemies  and  parasites  of  the  cotton 
worm.  They  are  very  numerous,  and  without 
their  aid  the  worms  must  have  done  infinitely 
more  damage  than  they  have  accomplished; 
but,  practically  speaking,  we  need  devote  no  space  to  their  detailed 
consideration,  as  they  can  not  be  practically  handled.  Their  increase 
can  not  be  encouraged  beyond  the  enforcement  of  general  laws  against 
the  killing  of  insectivorous  birds.  A  few  of  the  most  important  of  the 
predaceous  and  parasitic  insects  are  shown  in  the  accompanying  figures. 
The  little  egg  parasite,  Trichogramma  pretiosa  (fig.  13),  is  one  of  the 
most  important.  Mr.  Hubbard  has  recorded 
the  fact  that  in  Florida  this  one  parasite 
almost  entirely  annihilated  the  fifth  brood. 
At  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  brood  about 
half  of  the  eggs  were  destroyed  by  this  insect. 
Of  the  eggs  laid  by  the  fourth-brood-moths, 
from  75  per  cent  to  90  per  cent  were  parasit- 
ized, while  of  the  eggs  of  the  fifth  brood  the 
proportion  destroyed  by  the  parasite  exceeded 
DO  per  cent,  and  out  of  the  sixth  brood  care- 
ful estimates  show  that  but  3  or  4  eggs  out 
of  100  escaped.  The  external  parasite  of  the  caterpillar  Euplectrus 
comstocJcii  (fig.  15),  is  also  another  abundant  parasite,  while  the  other 
insects  figured  take  almost  as  important  parts  in  limiting  the  increase 
of  the  worm.  As  far  back  as  1847  Dr.  D.  B.  Gorham  found  that  nearly 
all  of  the  chrysalids  of  the  last  brood  of  worms  were  destroyed  by 
Pimpla  conquisitor  (fig.  16).  From  this  fact  he  argued  that  the  fields 
must  be  restocked  by  moths  flying  up  from  the  South,  and  perhaps 
from  the  West  Indies.    It  is  a  very  curious  fact  that  some  twenty-five 


Fig.  15.— Skin  of  cotton  caterpillar 
attached  to  the  underside  of  cot- 
ton leaf  hy  silk  spun  about  the 
pupae  of  Euplectrus  comstockii — 
natural  size  (from  Fourth  Report 
U.  S.  Entomological  Commission). 


INSECTS    WHICH    AFFECT    THE    COTTON   PLANT. 


32i 


years  later  Mr.  A.  E.  Grote,  studying  the  cotton  worm  in  Georgia, 
was  unable  to  find  any  parasites  whatever,  and  from  this  fact  argued 
that  the  insect  was  not  a  normal  member  of  the  Georgia  fauna,  but  flew 
in  every  year,  probably  from  the  West  Indies. 


REMEDIES. 

In  the  Fourth  Report  of  the  United  States  Entomological  Commis- 
sion nearly  200  pages  were  given  to  the  consideration  of  remedies 
and  preventive  measures.  All  the  false  ideas  which  had  gained 
currency  among  planters  were  explained  away,  an  extensive  con- 
sideration of  remedies  against  the  insect  in  all  stages  was  given, 
and  the  subject  of  machinery  for  the  distribution  of  wet  and  dry  poi- 
sons was  most  elaborately  treated.  The  chapters  on  remedies  in  this 
report  have  resulted  in  great  benefit  to  the  agricultural  community  as 
a  whole.  The  system  of  eddy-chamber  or  cyclone  nozzles  was  here  first 
treated,  and  modi- 
fications of  these 
nozzles  are  now  in 
active  use  in  all 
parts  of  the  world 
for  the  application 
of  insecticides  and 
fungicides  to  very 
many  crops.  Sev- 
eral elaborate 
<nachines  for  the 
distribution  of  wet 
poisons  were  i  n  - 
vented  in  the  course 
of  the  investiga- 
tion,and  all  devices 
which  had  been 
patented  received 
consideration.  Although,  as  just  stated,  this  work  has  been  of  great 
value  to  agriculture  and  horticulture  at  large,  its  results  from  the 
standpoint  of  the  cotton  grower  have,  for  the  reasons  stated  in  our 
introduction,  amounted  practically  to  nothing  down  to  the  present  time. 

In  1883  Dr.  W.  S.  Barnard,  who  had  been  in  charge  of  the  insecticide 
machinery  portion  of  the  cotton-worm  investigation,  was  sent  to  Ala- 
bama to  make  field  tests  of  the  largest  and  apparently  most  practical 
machines  which  had  been  devised.  He  found  that  the  large  machines, 
so  arranged  as  to  underspray  sixteen  rows  of  cotton  at  once,  were  com- 
paratively impractical,  except  in  a  very  few  cases.  Were  cotton  so 
planted  that  the  rows  were  equally  spaced,  the  machine  would  work  very 
well,  but  the  inflexibility  of  the  larger  machines  prevented  them  from 
conforming  to  inequalities  of  the  ground  and  to  uneven  rows.  Every 
cotton  planter  knows  that  in  an  average  cotton  field  the  necessities  of 


Fig.  16. — Pimpla  conquisitor,  one  of  the  principal  parasites  of  the  cotton 
caterpillar:  a.  larva,  enlarged;  b,  head  of  same,  still  more  enlarged; 
c,  pupa;  d,  adult  female,  enlarged:  e,f,  end  of  abdomen  of  adult  male, 
still  more  enlarged  (from  Fourth  Report  TJ.  S.  Entomological  Commis- 
sion). 


326  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

the  case  will  not  allow  of  ideally  true  rows.  The  rows  must  run  wider 
or  narrower  according-  to  the  quality  of  the  soil  and  the  size  of  tbe  plant 
a  certain  soil  will  produce.  It  was  found,  therefore,  tliat  an  attempt  to 
underspray  more  than  four  rows  at  once  was  practically  useless.  A 
good  account  of  the  best  apparatus  for  spraying  this  amount  of  cotton 
at  a  single  operation  has  been  published  by  the  Division  of  Entomology 
of  this  Department. ] 

We  have  briefly  indicated  in  the  introduction  to  this  article  the  fact 
that  such  extensive  remedial  work  against  this  insect  as  was  planned 
in  the  Fourth  lieport  of  the  United  States  Entomological  Commission 
has  not  of  late  been  found  necessary  in  the  South,  and  have  hinted 
at  some  of  the  reasons.  Perhaps  the  main  reason,  however,  is  that 
a  change  has  taken  place  in  Southern  agriculture,  which  has  fre- 
quently been  urged  by  writers  upon  economic  entomology  as  most  con- 
ducive  to  the  limitation  of  widespread  damage  by  any  given  species 
of  injurious  iusect.  This  is  the  greater  diversification  of  crops.  Cot- 
ton is  no  longer  planted  everywhere,  as  in  the  broad  fields  which 
were  so  common  twenty  years  and  more  ago.  As  a  characteristic 
instance,  we  may  take  the  case  of  a  prominent  planter  at  Columbus, 
Tex.,  who  in  1880  had  500  acres  of  cotton  under  cultivation  in  a  bend 
of  the  Colorado  Eiver.  In  1894  he  had  of  the  same  area  300  acres  in 
corn,  100  acres  in  Johnson  grass,  and  only  1(!0  acres  in  cotton.  It  is 
readily  seen  that  such  a  breaking  up  of  the  immense  cotton  fields  of 
the  South  will  to  a  great  extent  prevent  any  undue  multiplication 
of  the  caterpillars  and  consequent  migration  northward  of  the  moths. 
Twenty  years  ago,  moreover,  remedial  work  on  a  large  scale  was  not 
attempted  by  cotton  planters.  Later  the  knowledge  of  the  importance* 
of  poisoning  for  the  early  broods  has  inspired  planters  with  a  feeling  of 
confidence,  which  has  since  steadily  grown,  both  as  the  result  of  suc- 
cessful remedial  work  on  a  more  or  less  small  scale  and  the  undoubt- 
edly smaller  numbers  of  the  worms.  Further,  the  development  of  the 
cotton-seed  oil  industry  has  been  an  important  factor.  In  earlier  times 
rank-growing  varieties  of  cotton,  producing  few  seeds,  but  of  long  fiber, 
were  grown.  Now  that  cotton  seed  is  worth  from  $9  to  $15  a  ton, 
smaller  varieties  of  cotton,  with  a  shorter  fiber  and  a  higher  proportion 
of  seeds,  are  more  popular.  The  fields  are  thus  more  open,  aud  not 
only  afford  a  better  opportunity  for  remedial  work  when  necessary,  but 
also  show  plainly  the  first  "ragging"  of  the  leaves  and  prevent  the 
worms  from  working  in  numbers  comparatively  out  of  sight  until  one 
or  more  generations  have  developed  and  the  moths  have  become  suffi- 
ciently numerous  to  lay  eggs  for  the  old  and  greatly  feared  "third 
brood."  These  points  and  others  have  already  been  reported  by  Mr. 
E.  A.  Schwarz,  of  this  office.2  His  article  is  a  result  of  observations 
made  upon  an  official  trip  through  the  cotton  belt  in  the  summer  of 
1894.     At  many  points  he  found  the  sentiment  among  planters  to  be 

1  Bui.  3,  pp.  39-47.  2  Insect  Life,  Vol.  VII,  No.  4. 


INSECTS  WHICH  AFFECT  THE  COTTON  PLANT.      327 

that  the  cotton-worm  question  is  solved.  As  a  result  of  these  observa- 
tions and  of  the  reports  of  Professor  Atkinson  in  Alabama  and  Pro- 
fessor Tracy  in  Mississippi,  as  well  as  from  conversations  had  with  a 
number  of  influential  cotton  planters  and  correspondence  with  others, 
Ave  are  quite  inclined  to  believe  that  the  simple  method  of  using'  undi- 
luted and  dry  paris-green  powder  which  has  sprung  up  throughout  the 
South  is  probably  capable  of  maintaining  present  conditions.  So  far 
as  we  know,  the  large  machines  recommended  in  the  Fourth  Eeport  of 
the  Entomological  Commission  have  never  been  built  and  operated  by 
planters.  Some  effort  has  been  made  since  the  close  of  the  cotton- 
worm  investigation  to  put  patented  machines  upon  the  market,  and 
this  effort  was  largely  due  to  the  increase  of  the  caterpillars  in  1890. ] 

The  distribution  of  dry  paris  green  from  two  bags  held  at  the  ends  of 
a  pole  over  the  back  of  a  horse  or  mule  is  a  process  which  has  developed 
apparently  spontaneously.  At  least  ten  years  ago  the  process  was 
described  to  the  author  in  a  conversation  with  Hon.  Charles  E. 
Hooker,  Member  of  Congress  from  the  Seventh  district  of  Mississippi. 
Writing  in  July,  1890,  Prof.  G.  F.  Atkinson,  of  Alabama,  spoke  of  it  as 
a  "recent'''  method.  The  Mississippi  ExperimeutStation,  in  June,  1890, 
described  the  method  as  one  which  had  been  recently  developed.2 
Prof.  J.  S.  Newman,  of  Auburn,  Ala.,  used  the  process  as  early  as  1887. 
It  is  quite  probable,  however,  that  this  method  dates  back  to  early  in 
the  seventies.  The  method  is  described2  by  the  Mississippi  Experiment 
Station  as  follows: 

Make  two  sacks  of  heavy  cloth,  each  about  10  inches  long  and  4  in  diameter,  open 
•the  whole  length  of  one  side  and  firmly  sewed  at  the  ends.  We  have  found  8  ounce 
osnahurg  the  best  cloth  for  the  purpose.  Take  a  strip  of  oak  or  other  strong  wood 
about  Tt  by  2  inches  and.  5  feet  long,  and  bore  a  1-inch  hole  5  inches  from  each  end. 
Tack  one  of  the  sacks  to  each  end  of  the  pole,  fastening  one  of  the  edges  of  the 
opening  to  each  of  the  narrow  sides  of  the  pole. 

The  sacks  can  be  filled,  by  pouring  the  poison  through  a  funnel  inserted,  in  the 
holes  through  the  pole,  aud  distributed  l>y  riding  on  horseliack  through  the  cotton 
rows,  dusting  two  rows  at  a  time.  A  little  practice  will  enable  one  to  do  this  work 
very  evenly,  and  care  must  be  taken  not  to  allow  the  sacks  to  touch  the  leaves  when 
wet  or  the  poison  will  not  pass  through.  Wheu  the  sacks  are  freshly  filled  a  very 
slight  jarring  will  shake  out  a  sufficient  amount  of  the  poison,  but  when  nearly 
empty  the  pole  should  lie  frequently  and  sharply  struck  with  a  short  stick,  or  spaces 
in  the  rows  will  be  missed. 


1  Three  machines  were  patented  in  1890 — the  Roach  cotton-worm  destroyer,  pat- 
ented by  the  James  P.  Eoach  Manufacturing  Company,  Vicksburg,  Miss. ;  the  Rogers 
dry-poison  distributor,  patented  by  the  Rogers  Company,  of  Lagrange,  Tex.,  and  the 
Brown  machine,  manufactured  and  sold  by  L.  M.  Rumsey  &  Co.,  at  St.  Louis,  Mo. 
All  of  these  cost  $50  or  more  each,  and  while  all  were  probably  capable  of  doing  the 
work  claimed  for  them  the  sales  were  small.  One  company  has  gone  out  of  business, 
and  the  machines  of  the  others  have  not  been  extensively  used.  Should  a  season  of 
great  caterpillar  abundance  come,  either  of  these  machines  may  be  used  to  good 
advantage,  or  the  smaller  spray  distributor  described  in  the  Fourth  Report  of  the 
Entomological  Commission,  or  a  number  of  the  spraying  machines  put  upon  the  mar- 
ket of  late  years  in  the  North  may  be  adapted  to  field  use  in  the  South, 

2  Mississippi  Sta.  Bui.  2. 


328  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

When  used  iu  this  way  we  have  found  it  the  best  plan  to  use  the  poison  without 
any  admixture  of  flour,  and  if  flour  is  to  be  added  lighter  cloth  should  be  used  in 
making  the  sacks. 

With  a  pole  and  sacks  as  described,  one  man  and  mule  can  poison  from  15  to  20 
acres  per  day. 

THE   COTTON  BOLLWORM. 
(Heliothis  armiger  Hiibn.) 

Unlike  the  cotton  worm,  this  insect  is  by  no  means  confined  to  Amer- 
ica, nor  is  it  confined  to  cotton  as  a  food  plant.  It  is  known  in  many 
other  parts  of  the  world,  and  it  can  not  be  surmised  at  the  present  time 
whether  it  has  been  carried  from  some  one  point  or  whether  it  is  indig- 
enous over  its  extremely  wide  range.  Its  food  plants  vary  in  extraordi- 
nary degree.  In  this  country  it  is  one  of  the  principal  enemies  of  cotton, 
of  corn,  and  of  the  tomato. 

The  cotton  bollworm,  the  corn  earworm,  and  the  tomato  fruit  worm 
are  all  the  same  species.  In  addition  to  these  crops,  it  feeds  upon  peas 
and  beans,  tobacco,  pumpkin,  squash,  okra,  and  a  number  of  garden 
flowering  plants,  such  as  cultivated  geranium,  gladiolus,  mignonette,  as 
well  as  a  number  of  wild  plants. 

GENERAL  AI*PEARANCE,  HABITS,  AND   LIFE   HISTORY. 

The  egg. — The  egg  is  a  little  larger  than  that  of  the  cotton  worm  and 
more  nearly  round.  It  is  nearly  white  in  color  and  rather  inclined  to 
yellowish.  Examined  with  a  lens,  its  structure  seems  to  be  almost 
identical  with  that  of  the  cotton  worm.  The  eggs  are  laid  upon  all 
parts  of  the  cotton  plant,  occurring  most  abundantly  on  the  underside 
of  the  leaf.  A  few  can  be  found  upon  the  stalks,  many  upon  the  upper* 
surface  of  the  leaves,  some  upon  the  involucre,  and  occasionally  they  are 
seen  upon  the  stems  of  the  boll  or  upon  the  leaf  of  the  petiole.  The  eggs 
are  laid  just  at  twilight,  and  they  hatch  in  from  two  days  to  a  week. 

The  larva. — When  first  hatched,  the  bollworm  looks  much  like  the 
cotton  worm.  It  is  rather  darker  in  color,  but  also  walks  like  a  looper, 
or  measuriug  worm.  It  feeds  at  first  near  the  eggshell,  and  then  begins 
to  wander  away,  crawling  from  one  leaf  to  another,  until  a  young  bud 
or  boll  is  found,  into  which  it  bores.  Frequently  several  days  pass  in 
this  search  for  a  boll,  and  rarely  the  worm  may  reach  full  growth  upon 
a  diet  of  leaves.  It  is  during  this  early,  wandering,  leaf-feeding  exist- 
ence that  the  insect  may  be  destroyed  by  arsenical  poisons,  as  is  true  of 
the  cotton  worm.  When  the  young  worm  enters  the  flower  bud  the  invo- 
lucre flares  open  and  the  young  bud  or  young  boll  finally  drops.  This 
"shedding"  of  cotton  is,  however,  not  caused  by  the  bollworm  alone. 
Other  insects  are  concerned  in  the  damage,  and  the  flaring  and  dropping 
occasionally  occurs  when  no  insect  injury  can  be  found.  A  very  con- 
siderable amount  of  damage  may  be  done  in  this  way,  as  a  single 
young  larva  will  travel  from  bud  to  bud,  deserting  each  before  it  falls. 
The  bud  pierced  just  before  opening  is  forced  into  premature  bloom, 
but  the  worm  usually  feeds  upon  the  stamens  and  pistil,  rendering  it 


DESCRIPTION   OF   PLATE   IV. 

TRANSFORMATIONS   OF   COTTON   BOLLWOKM. 
(Ueliothts  armujer  Hiibn.) 

Fig.  1.  Egg  ou  underside  of  cotton  leaf. 

Fig.  2.  Larva  one-third  grown  boring  into  square. 

Fig.  3.  Entrance  bole  of  young  larva  in  square,  with  excremental  pellets  at  edge  of 
hole. 

Fig.  4.  Nearly  full-grown  larva  just  issued  from  boll. 

Fig.  5.  Full-grown  larva  ou  leaf  stem. 

Fig.  6.  Pupa  shown  in  center  of  underground  earthen  cell;  cell  shown  in  longi- 
tudinal section. 

Fig.  7.  Adult  moth,  light  variety. 

Fig.  8.  Adult  moth  with  dark  forewings. 

Fig.  9.  Adult  moth  iu  resting  position,  wings  slightly  elevated,  hind  border  of 
hind  wings  slightly  showing. 


U.  S.  Dept  of  Agriculture,  Expt.  Station  Bui.  No.  33 


Plate  IV. 


Transformations  of  Cotton  Bollworm. 


INSECTS  WHICH  AFFECT  THE  COTTON  PLANT.      329 

incapable  of  fructifying.  As  the  bollworms  grow  they  begin  to  vary 
greatly  in  general  appearance.  Full-grown  worms  may  be  found  of 
almost  every  intermediate  stage  of  color  between  light  green  and  dark 
brown  or  rose.  They  may  be  unstriped  and  unspotted,  or  they  may 
possess  dark  stripes  or  black  spots.  These  color  varieties  are  not 
caused  by  different  food,  since  many  variations  occur  in  specimens 
feeding  upon  the  same  plant.  Upon  cotton  the  larger  worms  take  the 
larger  bolls,  the  young  ones  having  confined  themselves  in  the  main  to 
the  flower  buds  and  the  newly  formed  bolls.  They  then  practically 
progress  downward,  the  young  ones  being  found  mainly  upon  the  top 
crop,  while  the  older  ones  bore  into  the  older  bolls  of  the  middle  crop, 
tbe  bottom  crop  being  seldom  seriously  damaged  by  this  insect.  Often 
a  single  worm  will  practically  destroy  several  large  bolls,  and  one 
instance  is  on  record  where  18  young  bolls  and  many  blooms  and 
unopened  flower  buds  have  been  destroyed  by  one  not  fully  grown 
worm.  The  bollworm  is  not  only  a  voracious  plant  feeder,  but  it  is  also 
a  cannibal.  Older  worms  feed  upon  younger  ones,  and  it  has  often  been 
known  to  eat  the  chrysalids  of  the  cotton  caterpillar.  With  au  abun- 
dance of  vegetable  food  at  hand,  the  larger  worms  will  seize  upon  their 
small  brothers,  biting  through  the  skin  and  feeding  upon  the  juices  of 
the  body.  In  ears  of  corn  the  remains  of  several  young  worms  are 
often  found,  while  the  strong,  large  worm  which  has  destroyed  them  is 
the  only  living  occupant  of  the  ear.  The  larva  occupies  from  two 
weeks  to  a  month  in  reaching  full  growth. 

The  pupa,  or  chrysalis. — Unlike  the  cotton  caterpillar,  the  bollworm 
enters  the  ground  in  order  to  transform.  It  forms  an  oval  cell  com- 
posed of  particles  of  earth  held  together  by  a  loose,  gummy  silk,  or  the 
pupa  may  be  perfectly  naked.  It  is  of  a  light  mahogany  color,  darker 
toward  the  head,  and  the  duration  of  this  state  is  from  one  to  four 
weeks. 

The  adult  insect. — The  adult  insect  of  the  bollworm  is  a  moth  about 
the  size  of  the  cotton-worm  moth,  but  has  a  stouter  body  and  is  more 
extensively  marked,  as  well  as  more  variable  in  its  markings.  Its 
general  color  varies  from  a  dull  ochre-yellow  to  a  dull  olive-green.  The 
fore  wings  have  a  rather  dark  band  near  the  tip  and  the  hind  wings  are 
also  bordered  with  a  darker  band.  The  wing  veins  are  lined  with  black 
and  the  fore  wings  have  also  several  dark  spots.  There  is  great  varia- 
tion in  these  markings,  and  they  are  intensified  in  some  individuals  and 
almost  lacking  in  others.  When  the  moth  is  at  rest,  the  fore  wings  are 
slightly  open,  whereas  in  the  cotton- worm  moth  they  are  closed  in  a 
roof-shaped  manner.  The  moth  flies  normally  about  dusk,  lays  about  500 
eggs,  and  is  not  a  fruit  feeder  like  the  cotton-worm  moth.  During  the 
day  they  hide  in  cowpeas  and  in  clover,  when  these  grow  near  the  cot- 
ton field,  and  fly  low  with  a  quick  darting  motion  when  disturbed. 
About  sunset  they  begin  to  feed  upon  the  honey  secreted  by  the  cow- 
pea  and  blossoms  of  clover,  as  well  as  upon  the  nectar  of  the  cotton 


330  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

plant  and  other  honey-secreting  plants.  Mr.  Mally  speaks  of  seeing 
tbe  moths  eating  at  3  o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  and  Mr.  Mullen  states 
that  he  has  noticed  them  feeding  freely  during  all  hours  except  the 
early  morning  hours,  and  during  1892  noted  them  particularly  deposit- 
ing their  eggs  in  broad  daylight. 

Number  of  generations. — The  average  time  occupied  by  the  insect  in 
its  transformations  from  egg  to  the  adult  is  about  thirty -eight  days. 
The  number  of  annual  generations  is  about  five.  In  the  cotton -growing 
States  the  worms  of  the  first  three  generations  feed  usually  in  the  corn 
fields.  In  fact,  in  choice  of  food  plants,  cotton  seems  to  be  secondary 
to  corn.  They  feed  upon  corn  by  preference  until  this  becomes  too  hard 
to  be  readily  eaten.  The  worms  of  the  first  generation  make  their 
appearance  the  latter  part  of  April  or  early  in  May,  and  feed  almost 
exclusively  upon  the  leaves  and  terminal  buds  of  corn.  The  second 
generation,  appearing  iu  early  June,  feed  upon  the  tassels  and  forming 
ears  of  corn,  while  the  third  appears  hi  July  and  feeds  upon  the  hard- 
ening corn.  When  the  fourth  generation  appears,  the  corn  has  become 
too  hard  for  appropriate  food  and  the  moths,  therefore,  fly  to  neighbor- 
ing cotton,  which  carries  at  that  time  plenty  of  tender  young  bolls.  A 
few  worms  will  have  been  found  upon  cotton  before  this  time  and  will 
have  fed  upon  the  leaves  and  flower  buds  only  in  the  absence  of  bolls. 
Others  will  have  been  found  upon  tomatoes,  if  these  are  grown  upon 
the  plantation,  while  still  others  have  been  feeding  upon  cowpeas.  As 
a  genera]  thing  bollworms  are  seen  in  force  upon  cotton  about  the  first 
of  August,  and  usually  these  individuals  belong  to  the  fourth  genera- 
tion. The  fifth  generation  makes  its  appearance  about  the  middle  of 
September,  and  about  the  middle  of  October,  or  even  earlier,  the  cater- 
pillars enter  the  ground  for  transformation  to  pupa?. 

Hibernation. — The  bulk  of  the  bollworms  hibernate  in  the  pupa  state 
underground.  In  a  warm  fall  the  moths  have  been  known  to  issue 
during  the  month  of  November,  and  Mr.  Mally  has  shown  that  fre- 
quently a  few  moths  hibernate.  These  hibernating  moths  appear  and 
begin  laying  eggs  much  earlier  than  the  moths  which  issue  from  over- 
wintered pupse.  This  results  in  something  of  a  confusion  of  generations 
the  following  season,  and  at  Shreveport,  La.,  Mr.  Mally  found  a  series 
of  small  broods  along  with  the  more  or  less  regular  large  ones,  a  sixth 
generation  of  worms  appearing  a  little  later  in  .the  fall  and  hibernating 
in  the  pupa  state.  In  evidence  of  this  fact  he  adduces  the  finding  of 
young  bollworms  as  late  as  November  20.  Young  and  old  worms  may, 
in  fact,  be  found  simultaneously  after  the  middle  of  May.  Mr.  Mally's 
observations,  however,  were  founded  upon  two  seasons'  observations 
only,  and  this  state  of  affairs  may  be  exceptional,  particularly  as  the 
winter  of  1890-91,  when  he  made  his  observations,  was  unusually  mild 
in  Louisiana  and  the  spring  earlier  than  usual.  In  Arkansas  four  and 
five  generations  are  found  in  the  northern  and  southern  portions  of  the 
State,  while  in  southern  Texas  six  generations  and  a  partial  seventh 
seems  to  be  the  rule.    The  determination  of  the  time  of  the  appearance  of 


INSECTS   WHICH   AFFECT    THE    COTTON    PLANT.  331 

the  several  generations  of  moths  for  each  differing  locality  is  of  very 
considerable  importance,  and  can  only  be  made  by  local  observers.  It 
is  of  importance  in  arranging  for  the  trap-crop  method  of  protecting 
cotton,  which  will  be  discussed  under  the  head  of  remedies. 

NATURAL   ENEMIES. 

The  bollworm  has  by  no  means  as  many  natural  enemies  as  the  cot- 
ton caterpillar.  The  latter  insect  feeds  exposed  upon  the  leaves,  and  is, 
therefore,  subject  to  the  attacks  of  predaceons  and  parasitic  insects 
as  well  as  birds.  The  bollworm,  however,  as  a  general  thing,  feeding 
in  the  interior  of  the  cotton  boll,  or  ear  of  corn,  or  fruit  of  tomato,  or 
pea  or  bean  pod,  is  not  readily  found.  In  fact,  although  birds  have 
been  noticed  to  feed  upon  it,  it  was  long  considered  to  be  absolutely 
free  from  true  parasites.  Riley,  however,  bred  a  Tachina  fly  from  the 
larva,  and  Hubbard  reared  the  little  egg  parasite  Trichogramma  preti- 
osa  from  the  bollworm  eggs  in  Florida.  The  more  recent  investigations 
of  Mally  have  resulted  in  finding  four  additional  parasites.  One  of 
these  is  an  egg  parasite  of  the  genus  Telenomus.  Another  is  a  species 
of  Limneria,  while  the  other  two  are  the  common  Eupleetrus  comstochii 
How.  and  Chalets  ovata  Say,  which  are  such  abundant  parasites  of  the 
cotton  worm.  The  hairy  or  downy  woodpeckers  are  frequent  visitors 
of  cornfields  and  have  been  seen  to  extract  the  worms  from  infested 
ears. 

REMEDIES. 

Lights  for  trapping  moths. — This  is  one  of  the  remedies  which  have 
been  most  often  advised,  and  has  been  very  extensively  used  in  parts 
of  the  South,  particularly  in  Texas.  Schwarz,  in  1879,  found  that  a 
small  trap  lantern  was  extensively  used  by  planters  in  the  vicinity  of 
Ilearne,  Tex.,  and  was  inclined  to  think  that  some  good  was  accom- 
plished by  its  use.  The  same  year  a  large  tomato  grower  at  Mandarin, 
Fla.,  built  large  fires  in  his  fields,  with  tbe  evident  result  of  greatly  les- 
sening the  number  of  worms  in  his  crop,  which  had  the  previous  year 
been  almost  entirely  destroyed  by  them.  In  view  of  these  facts,  Mally, 
during  his  two  summers'  investigations,  made  extensive  experiments 
with  trap  lights  for  the  moths.  He  has  carefully  tabulated  all  the 
insects  which  were  captured  in  this  way.1  A  few  bollworm  moths  were 
caught,  but  these  apparently  by  accident,  and  a  thoroughly  unpreju- 
diced conclusion  from  his  experiments  must  be  that  the  use  of  lights 
for  attracting  and  trapping  bollworm  moths  is  without  beneficial  result. 
The  other  insects  caught  by  the  light  were  found  to  be  about  evenly 
divided  between  those  which  are  beneficial  and  those  considered  inju- 
rious; but  most  of  the  insects  called  injurious  are  of  no  especial 
economic  importance  in  the  cotton  region  and  should  be  omitted  from 
consideration  in  forming  conclusions.  The  use  of  lights,  from  a  cotton- 
growing  standpoint,  is  really  a  disadvantage,  and  money  expended  in 
this  practice  is  without  doubt  entirely  lost. 


U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div.  of  Ent.Bul.  29. 


332  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

Poisoned  stveets. — Together  with  the  use  of  lanterns  for  attracting  the 
moths,  poisoned  sweets  have  been  recommended  for  many  years.  The 
first  experiment  of  this  kind  of  which  we  are  aware  was  made  by  B.  A. 
Sorsby,  and  is  recorded  in  the  Annual  Report  of  this  Department  for 
1855.  He  used  vinegar  and  molasses  in  plates  set  upon  small  stakes 
in  the  cotton  field,  and  his  statement  was  that  he  captured  from  18  to 
35  moths  to  each  plate  for  several  days.  Mally  also  experimented  in 
this  direction  and  found  that  a  modification  of  this  remedy  is  more 
or  less  effective.  He  advises  the  planting  of  a  few  rows  of  cowpeas  as 
a  trap  bordering  the  cotton  fields.  They  should  be  planted  so  late  as 
not  to  reach  the  height  of  blooming  before  the  destructive  August 
brood  appears.  A  portion  of  the  row  should  be  sprayed  over  every 
night  with  a  mixture  of  4  ounces  of  beer  to  2  ounces  of  potassium 
cyanid  solution.  The  moths  will  be  attracted  by  this  mixture  and  will 
be  destroyed  by  it.  The  mixture  dries  readily  and  hence  it  applied  in 
the  afternoon  will  not  result  in  the  destruction  of  any  day-flying  bene- 
ficial insects. 

Poisoning  the  icorms. — The  careful  study  which  has  been  made  of  tbe 
natural  history  of  the  bollworm,  particularly  that  by  Dr.  William  Tre- 
lease,  in  Alabama,  in  1880,  shows  that  where  arsenical  poisons  are 
applied  for  the  so-called  third  brood  of  the  cotton  worm,  about  August 
1,  many  bollworms  are  destroyed.  It  is  about  this  time  that  many 
young  worms  are  hatching  from  the  eggs  and  feeding  for  a  longer 
or  shorter  space  of  time  on  the  leaves  before  entering  the  bolls.  It 
was,  therefore,  thought  at  the  time  when  Comstock's  report  on  cotton 
insects  was  written  that  the  poisoning  for  the  cotton  worm,  which  was 
so  strongly  recommended  and  which  was  so  necessary  under  the  con- 
ditions governing  at  that  period,  would  largely  reduce  bollworm  injury. 
In  fact,  as  we  have  shown  in  our  opening  paragraph,  the  bollworm 
itself  at  that  time  was  by  no  means  such  a  factor  in  cotton  growing  as 
it  is  at  the  present  time.  With  the  great  reduction  of  damage  done  by 
the  cotton  worm  and  the  great  increase  of  that  done  by  the  bollworm, 
however,  poisoning  for  the  cotton  worm  has  become  comparatively  rare, 
and  on  account  not  only  of  the  greater  abundance  of  bollworms,  but 
also  of  the  consequent  greater  confusion  of  generations  of  this  insect, 
and  the  fact  that  not  more  than  half  at  the  outside  could  be  destroyed 
by  poisoning  at  any  one  given  time,  this  method  has  largely  lost  its 
former  value  as  a  bollworm  remedy.  Still,  in  seasons  of  great  boll- 
worm abundance,  and  where  early  trap-crop  methods  have  been  neg- 
lected, poisoning,  as  recommended  in  an  earlier  paragraph,  under  the 
head  of  "The  cotton  caterpillar,"  will  result  in  saving  at  least  a  part 
of  the  crop. 

Trap  crops. — In  the  intelligent  handling  of  trap  crops  the  cotton 
planter  will  find  by  far  the  most  efficacious  preventive  of  bollworm 
damage.  This  suggestion  is  an  old  one.  It  was  proposed  by  Sorsby 
in  1855,  by  E.  Sanderson  in  1858,  and  by  Peyton  King  in  1859.  It  was 
recommended  by  Comstock  after  careful  preliminary  observations  by 


INSECTS  WHICH  AFFECT  THE  COTTON  PLANT.      333 

Trelease  in  1879,  and  Kiley  in  1885  gives  it  at  least  equal  rank  as  a 
remedy  with  poisoning.  The  complete  development  of  the  trap-crop 
system,  however,  rests  upon  the  studies  and  recommendations  made  by 
Mally;1  and  S.  B.  Mullen,2  of  Ilarrisville,  Miss.,  has  written  in  a  most 
practical  manner  relative  to  corn.  Mally's  recommendations  are,  in 
brief,  when  planting  cotton  leave  vacant  strips  of  5  rows  for  every  25  of 
cotton.  In  these  5  rows,  at  the  earliest  possible  time,  plant  1  row  with 
an  early  maturing  sweet  corn.  It  should  not  be  drilled  in  too  thickly, 
as  a  minimum  number  of  plants  and  ears  is  desired.  During  the  silk- 
ing period  frequent  careful  examinations  must  be  made  as  to  the  num- 
ber of  bollworm  eggs.  As  soon  as  no  more  fresh  white  eggs  are  found 
each  morning,  the  silk  ends  of  the  corn  should  be  cut  away  and  burned 
or  fed  to  stock  in  order  to  destroy  the  young  worms  and  the  eggs.  A 
few  eggs  may  also  be  found  upon  the  leaves  of  the  plants,  and  since  no 
more  growth  is  to  be  made  the  plants  should  be  cut  and  destroyed. 
Then  3  more  of  the  rows  should  be  planted  to  dent  corn  at  such  a 
time  as  to  bring  the  silking  period  about  the  1st  of  July  or  a  little 
later.  Upon  these  rows  very  large  numbers  of  eggs  will  be  laid,  but 
they  should  be  allowed  to  mature  in  order  that  the  natural  enemies 
which  parasitize  the  eggs  and  prey  upon  the  larva?  may  not  be  destroyed. 
The  crowded  condition  of  the  worms  in  the  ears  developed  in  these 
3  rows  will  induce  cannibalism  to  such  an  extent  that  the  number  of 
worms  reaching  maturity  will  be  reduced  to  the  minimum,  and  these 
can  well  be  allowed  to  escape  if  the  natural  enemies  are  saved  thereby. 
To  trap  these  escaping  individuals,  however,  the  fifth  and  last  row  of 
the  vacant  strips  should  be  planted  to  sweet  corn  at  a  time  which  will 
allow  it  to  reach  full  silk  about  August  1,  since  the  majority  of  the 
moths  begin  issuing  again  about  that  time.  This  last  row  should  be 
carefully  watched,  and  the  corn  should  be  cut  and  destroyed  as  soon  as 
it  appears  that  no  more  eggs  are  being  deposited.  Mr.  Mally  found 
that  the  corn  produced  by  the  second  planting  is  likely  to  be  large 
enough  in  quantity  to  pay  for  expense  of  cultivation  and  the  sacrifice 
made  by  cropping  the  5  rows  in  corn  instead  of  cotton.  Moreover,  he 
thinks  that  if  the  first  two  plantings  are  well  managed  a  number  of 
the  earlier  broods  of  the  bollworm  will  be  so  reduced  that  the  August 
brood  will  not  be  capable  of  inflicting  great  injury,  and  therefore  in 
the  less-infested  regions  the  third  planting  may  be  dispensed  with.  He 
further  found  that  it  was  not  necessary  to  crop  the  entire  plantation 
with  this  5  to  25  rows  of  corn  to  cotton.  If  5  acres  be  planted  in  this 
way  for  every  50  acres  of  cotton,  or  even  5  acres  of  trap  alternate  for 
75  or  100  acres,  the  crop  of  the  entire  plantation  may  be  protected. 
The  accompanying  diagram  (page  340)  of  a  field  of  1,050  acres  will 
illustrate  the  proposed  system. 

^or  the  full  details  of  Mally's  experiments,  see  U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div.  of  Ent. 
Bui.  29. 
2  Insect  Life,  Vol.  V,  pp.  240-243. 


334 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


-r 

1 

Acres 
Corn 

AND 

OTTON 

CORN 

AN0 

OTTON 

* 

to         o 

a-    0 

UO                 CO 

UJ        Z 

0    t- 

cc     0 

<£    1- 

O     h- 

_    0 

<     •- 

0   , , 
up   ° 

0  3 

xn  ■—. 

«"       -» 

UJ    *- 

uj     Z 

K    P 

cc     0 

o   t- 

C/3 

CO 

0    1— 

CO 

3 

0 

or 

z 

CC 

5 

0 
CC 

z 
cc 

S3 

O 

or 

z 
cc 

a 

Acres 
Corn 

AND 

OTTON 

Acres 

CORN 

AND 
OTTON 

H 

LO             <~> 

h- 

h 

lC             C-P 

CO      -, 
UJ       ^ 

UJ        Z 

uJ      Z 

uJ      Z 

0=     P 

S       £ 

CC      O 

cd     O 

o    \- 

O      (- 

O     h- 

t  ° 

uO     '-' 

<     £ 

up    ^ 

acres 
Corn 

AND 
OTTON 

ACRES 

corn 

and 
OTTON 

uo           o 

u3     Z 
cc    0 

in           tj 

uJ      Z 

CC      O 

0  t- 

O      H- 

<    H 

<     H 

UJ 

ss 

UJ      Z 

or    0 

0=    P 

0    (- 

0   1- 

"J   2      S 

£*  0 

Acr 
Cor 

AND 
OTTI 

CC    q-Ol- 

LO                     O 

uO                O 

cO 

cO 

«    -» 

CO 

uJ     Z 

uJ     Z 

uj      Z 

uJ      Z 

cc    a 

cc    0 

CC       O 

cc    0 

O    (- 

O      (- 

O       1— 

0   h- 

<    H 

<      1- 

<£    H 

<  1- 

0   S 
UP   <-> 

CO 

0    O 

CO      — 

CO 

S3 

3 

03                ^ 

CO 

0 

CO                 z 

0 

Acre 
Corn 

AND 

OTTOI 

or 

z 

Qr 

or 

z 
cc 

ACRI 

CORN 

AND 
OTTO 

cc 

z 

cc 

u-i          0 

3 
h- 

2  z 

cc    0 
O     r- 

3i 

uO             <_> 

h 

uj      Z 

cc    0 

<C     H 

<  -K 

0    S 

uO    CJ 

co 

CO 

UJ      Z 

UJ      Z 

CC       O 

cr     0 

0     H 

0     1- 

<C     1- 

<     t- 

tfl                 Z 

0     r^ 
CO     ■— ' 

«              Z 

"J   z       0 

^    Z       0 

<  O       ° 

CC     q-  D|_ 

<  S<c3 

uo           ° 

■JO             0 

FlQ.  17. — Diagram  of  cotton  field,  showing  location  of  trap  corn. 


INSECTS    WHICH    AFFECT    THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


335 


THE    MEXICAN    COTTON-BOLL   WEEVIL. 

From  the  present  outlook  the  most  important  of  the  insects  which 
damage  the  cotton  boll,  next  to  the  bollworm  itself,  is  the  cotton-boll 
weevil  (Anthonomus  grand  is  Boh.). 

GENERAL  APPEARANCE  AND  METHOD  OF  WORK. 

This  insect  is  a  small,  grayish  weevil,  of  the  shape  and  general 
appearance  shown  in  fig.  18,  a,  and  measuring  a  little  less  than  a  quar- 
ter of  an  inch' in  length.  It  is  found  in  the  cotton  fields  throughout 
the  season,  puncturing  and  laying  its  eggs  in  the  squares  and  bolls. 
The  larvae,  of  the  shape  and  appearance  shown  at  fig.  18,  c,  and  measur- 
ing a  little  over  three-eighths  of  an  inch  m  length  when  full  grown, 
live  within  the  buds  and  bolls  and  feed  upon  their  interior  substance. 
The  squares  attacked  usually  drop,  but  most  of  the  damaged  bolls 
remain  upon  the 
plant  and  become 
stunted  or  dwarfed, 
except  late  in  the 
season,  when  they 
either  dry  or  rot. 

DISTRIIUTION. 

The  insect  through 
its  ravages  caused 
the  abandonment  of 
cotton  culture 
arou  n  d  Monclova, 
Mexico,  about  1862. 
Two  or  three  years 
ago  cotton  was  again  planted  in  that  vicinity,  but  the  weevil  immedi- 
ately reappeared  and  destroyed  the  crop.  At  Matamoras  the  weevil  was 
noticed  eight  or  ten  years  ago.  About  1893  it  crossed  the  Rio  Grande  at 
Brownsville,  Tex.,  and  in  1891  was  noticed  in  the  country  around  San 
Diego,  Alice,  and  Beeville.  At  the  close  of  the  season  of  1891  the  insect 
occupied  a  territory  extending  to  the  north  a  little  beyond  Beeville,  a 
few  miles  to  the  east  of  that  point,  and  southwest  to  the  neighborhood 
of  Realitos,  on  the  National  Mexican  Railway.  The  greatest  damage 
seems  to  have  been  done  along  the  lower  Nueces  River.  During  1895, 
and  particularly  in  the  latter  part  of  the  season,  it  extended  its  range 
to  a  considerable  extent.  Toward  the  east  it  was  found  in  moderate 
abundance  along  the  valley  of  the  Guadaloupe  River  at  Victoria, 
Thomaston,  and  Cuero.  North  of  its  old  range  it  extended  to  Kenedy, 
Floresville,  and  many  points  in  the  country  lying  between  the  latter 
place  and  Cuero.  A  single  field  was  found  near  San  Antonio  which 
contained  weevils  in  large  numbers,  and  in  the  same  way  a  single  field 


Fig.  18. 


-The cotton-boll  -weevil  i Anthonomus grandiss) :  a,  adult  beetle; 
6,  pupa;  c,  larva — enlarged  (from  Insect  Life). 


336 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


was  found  far  to  the  east,  at  Wharton,  in  which  the  weevils  had 
appeared  late  in  the  season.  The  exact  localities  where  the  insect  was 
found  daring  1895  are  indicated  on  the  accompanying  map. 


Fig.  19.— Map  showing  distribution  of  the  Mexican  cotton-boll  weevil  in  1895. 


NATURAL   HISTORY   AND    HABITS. 


The  insect  passes  the  winter  in  the  weevil  state.  It  can  be  found  on 
the  cotton  plant  until  late  in  December,  and,  in  fact,  as  long  as  any 
portion  of  the  plant  is  green.  It  is  found  most  abundantly  in  the  early 
winter  hidden  between  the  involucre  and  the  boll,  and  later  it  frequently 
works  its  way  down  into  the  dry  and  open  bolls.  All  the  specimens 
found  by  Mr.  Schwarz  in  such  situations  in  the  late  spring  of  1895  were 
dead;  but  Mr.  Townsend  found  a  few  living  in  March.  The  dry  boll 
is  probably  not  a  frequently  successful  hibernating  place.  Judge  S.  G. 
Borden,  of  Sbarpsburg,  however,  writing  under  date  of  January  27, 
1896,  states  that  the  weevil  at  that  time  was  being  found  nearly  every 
day  in  the  dry  bolls;  but  this  statement  lacks  the  significance  which  it 
might  otherwise  have  had  as  bearing  on  the  question  of  hibernation 


INSECTS    WHICH    AFFECT    THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


337 


from  the  fact  that  no  heavy  frost  had  probably  occurred  up  to  that  time 
at  Sharpsburg. 

With  the  cutting  of  the  plants,  or  with  the  rotting  or  drying  of  the 
bolls  as  a  result  of  frost,  the  adult  weevils  leave  the  plant  and  seek 
shelter  under  rubbish  at  the  surface  of  the  ground,  or  among  weeds 
and  trash  at  the  margin  of  the  fields.  Here  they  remain  until  the  warm 
days  of  spring,  when  they  fly  to  the  first  buds  on  such  volunteer  plants 
as  may  come  up  in  the  neighborhood.  They  feed  on  these  and  lay  their 
eggs  on  the  early  squares,  and  one  or  perhaps  two  generations  are 
developed  in  such  situations,  the  number  depending  upon  the  character 
of  the  season  and  the  date  of  cotton  planting.  By  the  time  the  planted 
cotton  has  grown  high  enough  to  produce  squares  the  weevils  have 
become  more  numerous,  and  those  which  have  developed  from  the  gen- 
eration on  voluuteer  cotton  attack  the  planted  cotton,  and  through 
their  punctures,  either  for  feed- 
ingor  egg  laying,  cause  a  whole- 
sale shedding  of  the  young 
squares.  It  seems  to  be  an 
almost  invariable  rule  that  a 
square  in  which  a  weevil  has 
laid  an  egg  drops  to  the  ground 
as  a  result  of  the  work  of  the 
larva-  in  the  square  on  the 
ground  the  larva  reaches  full 
growth,  transforms  to  pupa, 
and  issues  eventually  as  a 
beetle,  the  time  occupied  in 
this  round  approximating  four 
weeks.  Later,  as  the  bolls 
form,  the  weevils  attack  them 
also  and  lay  their  eggs  in  them, 
and  the  larva?  develop  in 
the  interior  just  as  with  the 
squares.  The  bolls,  however,  do  not  drop.  Figs.  20,  a,  and  20,  b,  show 
the  larvae  in  the  squares,  and  fig.  20,  c,  shows  a  young  boll  cut  open  and 
the  pupa  in  its  customary  position. 

There  is  a  constant  succession  of  generations  from  early  spring  until 
frost,  the  weevils  becoming  constantly  more  numerous  and  the  larva? 
and  pupae  as  well.  A  single  female  will  occupy  herself  with  egg  laying 
for  a  considerable  number  of  days,  so  that  there  arises  by  July  an  inex- 
tricable confusion  of  generations,  and  the  insect  may  be  found  in  the 
field  in  all  stages  at  the  same  time.  The  bolls,  as  we  have  just  stated, 
do  not  drop  as  do  the  squares,  but  gradually  become  discolored,  usually 
on  one  side  only,  and  by  the  time  the  larva  becomes  full  grown  generally 
crack  open  at  the  tip.  While  in  a  square  one  usually  finds  but  a  sin- 
gle larva,  in  a  full  grown  boll  as  many  as  twelve  have  been  found.  In 
1993— No.  33 22 


Fig.  20  — The  cotton-boll  weevil :  n,  newly  hatched  larva 
in  young  square;  6,  nearly  full-grown  larva  in  situ; 
c,  pupa  in  yomu 


boll  picked  from  ground. 


338 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


Fig.  21. — Mature  boll  cut  open  at  left,  showing  full-grown  larva;  the  one  at 
the  right  not  cut,  and  .showing  feeding  punctures 'and  oviposition  marks. 


any  case,  however,  the  hatching  of  a  single  larva  in  a  boll  results 
in  the  destruction  of  the  boll  to  such  an  extent  that  its  fiber  is  useless. 
Where  no  serious  frost  occurs  in  December,  the  insects  all,  or  nearly 
all,  reach  maturity  and  enter  hibernating  quarters,  although  larvae  have 
been  found  even  in  January  at  Sharpsburg.  Whenever  a  heavy  frost 
comes  in  this  month,  or  before,  the  observations  show  that  those  insects 

which  have  not 
reached  the  bee- 
tle stage  are 
nearly  all  killed. 
From  this  fact, 
it  follows  that 
the  insect  will 
probably  n  ot 
prove  as  inju- 
rious in  other 
portions  of  the 
cotton  belt  as 
it  is  in  south- 
ern Texas. 
It  was  found 

during  the  latter  part  of  1895  that  the  weevil  was  present  in  a  number 
of  localities  in  which  it  was  not  known  by  the  planters  themselves  to 
occur.  It  is  important  that  every  planter  who  lives  in  or  near  the 
region  which  we  have  mapped  out  should  be  able  to  discover  the 
weevil  as  soon  as  it  makes  its  appearance  in  his  fields.  Where  a  field 
is  at  all  badly  infested,  the  absence  of  bloom  is  an  indication  of  the 
presence  of  the  insect.  In  the  early  part  of  the 
season  the  weevils  attack  the  squares  first,  and 
these  wilt  and  drop  off.  A  field  may  be  in  full 
blossom,  and  as  soon  as  the  insect  spreads  well 
through  it  hardly  a  blossom  will  be  seen.  This 
dropping  alone,  however,  is  not  a  sufficient  in- 
dication of  the  weevil's  presence.  Squares  are 
shed  from  other  causes,  but  if  a  sufficient  num- 
ber of  fallen  squares  are  cut  open  the  cause  will 
be  apparent.  The  characteristic  larva  of  the 
weevil  will  be  quite  readily  recognizable  on  com- 
parison with  the  figures  which  we  publish  here- 
with. 

As  stated  above,  the  bolls  do  not  drop.  The 
punctures  made  by  the  weevils  in  feeding,  however,  are  comparatively 
characteristic,  and  where  a  boll  is  discolored  and  has  begun  to  crack  at 
the  tip  the  larva  or  the  pupa  can  be  seen  without  trouble  on  cutting  it 
open.  Late  in  the  season  the  weevils  themselves  will  be  found  between 
the  involucre  and  the  boll,  as  shown  in  fig.  22;  or  in  their  absence  the 


Fig.  22.— Late-fall  boll,  show- 
ing how  beetles  hide  be- 
tween boll  and  involucre. 

I 


INSECTS    WHICH   AFFECT   THE    COTTON   PLANT.  339 

feeding  marks  and  the  yellow,  granular  excrement  which  collects  in 
the  involucre  at  the  base  of  the  boll  are  excellent  indications. 

POPULAR  NAMES. 

In  south  Texas,  among  Spanish-speaking  people,  the  insect  is  gener- 
ally known  as  the  "  picudo,"  a  descriptive  name  which  refers  to  the  snont 
or  beak  of  the  insect.  English-speaking  planters  generally  referred  to 
the  insect  at  first  as  "the  sharpshooter,"  a  term  which  for  many  years 
has  been  applied  to  any  insect  which  causes  through  its  punctures  tue 
shedding  of  the  squares  or  the  rotting  of  the  bolls.  As  there  are  sev- 
eral native  insects  that  are  commonly  called  sharpshooters  and  which, 
though  injurious,  are  by  no  means  to  be  compared  with  this  insect,  it 
becomes  necessary  to  discourage  in  every  way  the  use  of  the  word  sharp- 
shooter as  applied  to  this  weevil.  The  adoption  of  the  term  "Mexican 
cotton-boll  weevil"  for  the  new  pest  is  recommended.  The  term  sharp- 
shooter is  now  much  less  generally  applied  to  the  weevil  than  it  was 
at  first.  Planters  generally  now  refer  to  it  as  the  boll  weevil,  or  the 
Mexican  weevil,  or  the  Mexican  boll  weevil. 

PARASITES   AND  NATURAL  ENEMIES. 

It  is  safe  to  say  that  little  assistance  will  be  derived  from  the  work 
of  natural  enemies  and  parasites  upon  this  insect.  Of  the  former  none 
of  any  importance  have  been  found.  Several  parasites,  however,  have 
been  found  to  attack  it,  and  in  one  or  two  localities  some  little  good 
has  resulted  from  their  work.  They  have  only  been  abundant,  how- 
ever, late  in  the  season,  after  the  weevil  has  completed  its  damage  for 
the  year,  and  at  a  time  when  a  minimum  of  good  can  be  accomplished 
by  the  destruction  of  the  larva.  The  majority  of  the  weevils  in  a  given 
field  fail  to  hibernate  successfully,  being  killed  by  cold  weather  or  some 
other  cause,  so  that  the  work  of  parasites  at  this  time  does  not  count. 
Careful  estimates,  however,  show  that  from  15  to  20  per  cent  of  the 
weevil  larvae  in  fallen  squares  in  November  at  Beeville  and  Kenedy 
were  destroyed  by  parasites.  There  is  a  bare  possibility  that  in  the 
original  home  of  the  weevil  (south  Mexico  and  some  Central  American 
States,  as  well  as  certain  of  the  West  Indies)  more  efficacious  parasites 
could  be  found,  but  this  possibility  is  hardly  sufficiently  strong  to  war- 
rant the  expense  of  a  search  expedition. 

REMEDIES. 

In  considering  the  matter  of  remedies  we  must  start  with  the  state- 
ment that  experience  has  shown  that  none  of  the  general  applications 
of  insecticides  will  be  of  the  slightest  value  against  this  species.  There 
are  measures,  however,  which  cotton  planters  may  adopt,  and  which,  if 
carried  out  generally  at  the  right  time,  will  postpone  the  appearance  of 
the  insect  in  injurious  numbers  for  one  or  two  generations,  even  if 
they  will  not  prevent  an  undue  multiplication  of  the  species.    These 


340  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

measures  are  directed  against  the  overwintered  weevils  and  the  larva?  of 
the  first  generation,  since  where  the  insect  has  once  become  numerous 
nothing  can  be  done  to  save  the  crop  from  practical  destruction. 

We  have  noticed  that  the  weevils  first  appear  in  spring  among  clus- 
ters of  young  squares  on  the  most  advanced  cotton  plants.  This  sug- 
gests the  possibility  of  trapping  these  earliest  beetles  by  means  of  a 
very  few  cotton  plants  especially  grown  for  this  purpose.  These  plants 
must  be  grown  at  convenient  points,  must  be  protected  from  front,  and 
forced  by  watering,  so  that  they  will  branch  out  and  acquire  buds  even 
in  advance  of  the  volunteer  cotton.  The  weevils,  which  issue  from 
hibernating  quarters  on  the  first  warm  days,  will  be  attracted  to  these 
plants  at  once,  and  can  be  easily  collected  and  killed,  if  the  plants  are 
examined  daily  until  the  cotton  in  the  fields  has  become  of  some  size. 
It  is  not  likely  that  this  plan  will  appeal  to  the  average  cotton  planter, 
but  we  are  convinced  that  much  good  can  be  done  by  its  general 
adoption. 

The  fact  that  the  spring  generation  develops  only  upon  volunteer 
cotton  has  suggested  the  possibility  that  the  insect  will  not  spread 
beyond  the  region  where  volunteer  cotton  will  grow  in  spring,  but 
unfortunately  this  possibility  is  by  no  means  absolutely  to  be  relied 
upon.  Nevertheless,  the  destruction  of  such  volunteer  plants  as  come 
up  in  cornfields  and  in  abandoned  fields  which  the  previous  year  were 
planted  to  cotton  can  not  be  too  strongly  recommended,  for  it  is  a 
matter  of  observation  that  the  shade  afforded  by  the  corn  or  the  rank- 
growing  weeds  which  come  up  in  abandoned  fields  is  especially  favor- 
able to  the  development  of  the  weevils. 

While  the  plants  are  young,  and  where  labor  is  as  cheap  as  it  i*  in 
south  Texas,  a  great  deal  of  good  can  be  accomplished  by  picking  and 
burning  the  fallen  squares,  and  if  this  is  done  promptly  a  large  number 
of  the  insects  will  be  destroyed.  It  should  be  done  at  least  twice,  at 
intervals  of  three  weeks,  during  the  period  while  the  plants  are  small. 
As  soon  as  the  plants  begin  to  branch  out,  however,  this  method  becomes 
impracticable,  on  account  of  the  difficulty  of  finding  the  squares  on  the 
ground. 

The  idea  of  picking  the  affected  bolls  during  the  cotton  picking  was 
suggested  in  the  writer's  first  published  account  of  this  insect.  It  was 
thought  that  the  affected  bolls  could  be  so  readily  recognized  that  many 
thousands  of  the  insects  could  be  destroyed  by  the  cotton  pickers  by 
picking  these  affected  bolls  and  carrying  them  away  in  a  separate 
receptacle  to  be  burned.  The  amount  of  extra  labor  involved  in  this 
operation,  however,  would  be  very  considerable,  and  the  affected  bolls 
in  many  instances  are  not  to  be  recognized  at  a  glance. 

These  measures,  aside  from  the  last  one,  together  with  early  planting 
and  clean  cultivation,  comprise  all  that  can  be  done  to  save  the  crop  of 
the  season  in  which  remedial  work  is  begun.  Where,  however,  these 
simple  measures  have  been  neglected,  or  where,  in  spite  of  their  adoption. 


INSECTS  WHICH  AFFECT  THE  COTTON  PLANT.      341 

the  weevils  are  injuriously  abundant  in  tlie  early  fall,  a  more  or  less 
efficient  method  of  reducing- the  numbers  of  the  insects  and  preventing 
such  great  damage  the  ensuing  year  is  at  hand.  In  general,  a  good 
first  crop  maybe  gathered  in  spite  of  the  weevils.  The  numbers  of  the 
insects  in  the  affected  region  are  small  during  the  early  part  of  the  year. 
Our  three  years'  experience  shows  that  they  become  destructively 
abundant  in  the  month  of  September  and  that  it  is  after  this  date  that 
a  general  spread  takes  place.  Under  favorable  conditions  and  in  the 
localities  most  badly  affected  the  top  crop  is  sure  to  be  destroyed.  This 
prospective  loss  will  become  evident  in  September  from  the  absence  of 
bloom.  The  prospect  of  any  further  picking  of  cotton  being  thus 
rendered  so  extremely  small,  a  suggestion  is  obtained  as  to  what  is 
perhaps,  after  all,  the  most  practical  way  of  reducing  the  numbers  of 
the  weevils  and  securing  approximate  immunity  for  the  succeeding 
summer,  and  that  is  the  cutting  down  and  burning  of  the  plants  at  a 
time  when  it  becomes  evident  that  the  cotton  yet  to  be  gathered  will 
be  very  small  in  quantity.  In  many  localities  this  could  be  done  to 
very  great  advantage  as  early  as  the  beginning  of  October,  and  several 
large  growers  of  cotton  have  undertaken  this  means.  The  success  of 
this  measure  will  naturally  depend  upon  uniformity  of  action  among  the 
planters  of  a  given  region,  and  the  difficulty  of  securing  this  uniformity 
is  the  main  argument  to  be  used  against  it.  Only  about  half  the  cotton 
in  Duval  County,  for  example,  seems  to  be  grown  by  the  proprietors  of 
the  land;  the  remainder  is  grown  by  renters,  who  will  be  not  at  all  dis- 
posed to  cut  down  their  plants  so  long  as  a  chance  remains  of  picking 
a  handful  of  cotton.  In  this  way  the  plants  in  many  fields  will  doubt- 
less be  left  standing  until  toward  the  end  of  December. 

Gould  anything  like  uniformity  be  secured,  either  by  legislation  or 
otherwise,  it  is  in  this  fall  destruction  of  the  cotton  that  our  best  hope 
lies  at  the  present  outlook;  and  in  this  connection  the  further  sugges- 
tion should  be  made  that  not  all  the  plants  in  any  given  field  should 
be  destroyed  in  this  way.  All  the  insects  which  are  in  the  larval  and 
pupal  condition  will  be  destroyed  when  the  cotton  is  burned,  but  those 
which  may  be  in  the  beetle  stage  will,  by  flight,  escape  alive.  If,  there- 
fore, a  certain  number  of  the  plants  are  left  standing  in  every  field, 
these  plants  will  attract  the  remaining  beetles,  which  will  settle  upon 
them,  so  that  they  may  readily  be  collected  day  after  day  and  destroyed. 
If  the  plants  are  all  cut  down  and  burned,  the  beetles  will  spread  far 
and  wide;  but  if  a  few  are  left  standing  in  this  way,  the  weevils  will 
concentrate  upon  them  in  such  a  way  that  they  can  be  easily  handled. 
Where  there  is  obviously  a  certain  amount  of  cotton  still  to  be  gath- 
ered after  the  early  part  of  October,  it  may  be  an  object  to  postpone 
this  cutting  down  and  burning  of  the  plants.  We  have  found  that  the 
weevil  continues  to  breed  and  may  be  found  in  the  bolls  in  all  stages 
up  to  the  time  of  the  first  frost.  The  cutting  and  burning  will  then 
accomplish  a  considerable  amount  of  good,  even  if  done  during  Novem- 
ber, although  October  would  be  far  better. 


342  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

From  the  present  outlook,  therefore,  the  best  hope  which  the  cotton 
planters  in  the  affected  region  will  have  for  the  future  Avill  be  in  follow- 
ing this  last-described  method  every  autumn,  and  the  more  thoroughly 
and  uniformly  (and,  in  fact,  the  earlier)  this  is  done  in  any  given 
locality  the  greater  will  be  the  chance  for  a  good  crop  the  following 
year.  Unfortunately,  after  talking  with  many  cotton  planters  in  this 
region,  we  are  by  no  means  sure  that  the  plan  will  be  at  all  generally 
followed,  for  the  reasons  suggested  above ;  and  as  the  pix>spects  ftf  these 
planters  themselves,  as  well  as  the  owners  of  cotton  plantations  in 
adjoining  regions  as  yet  uninfested,  will  depend  almost  entirely  on  the 
general  adoption  of  this  plan  or  some  better  one  which  may  yet  be  dis- 
covered, it  becomes  necessary  to  look  forward  to  the  enforcement  of 
remedial  work  by  legislation. 

It  will  be  greatly  to  the  interest  of  all  growers  of  cotton  in  the  prolific 
district  lying  to  the  northeast  of  the  region  at  present  infested  to  urge 
the  passage  of  an  act  by  the  legislature  which  will  bring  about  the 
enforcement  of  remedial  work.  This  act  should  provide  for  the  appoint- 
ment of  commissioners  in  each  county  upon  the  application  of  a  certain 
number  of  the  citizens  of  that  county.  These  commissioners  should 
be  empowered  to  enforce  remedial  work,  to  levy  penalties,  or  to  have 
the  work  done  by  their  own  agents,  the  cost  to  be  assessed  upon  the 
property.  It  will  be  well  to  let  this  law  have  a  wide  bearing,  and  not 
to  confine  its  application  to  this  particular  insect,  but  cover  all  injuri- 
ous insects,  in  case  of  future  emergencies  of  a  similar  nature.  Such  a 
law  should  be  passed  in  every  State  in  the  Union.  Though  it  might 
remain  inoperative  for  years,  its  application  would  be  available  in  case 
of  any  sudden  emergency,  such  as  the  introduction  from  a  foreign 
country  of  a  new  injurious  insect  or  the  sudden  multiplication  and 
spread  of  any  one  of  our  native  species. 

SUMMARY   OF   REMEDIES. 

(1)  Trapping  overwintered  beetles  by  means  of  a  few  early  planted 
cotton  plants. 

(2)  Destruction  of  volunteer  plants  in  cornfields  or  abandoned  fields. 

(3)  Picking  fallen  squares  as  fast  as  practicable,  from  the  time  the 
squares  are  formed  on  the  plant. 

(4)  Cutting  and  burning  the  cotton  stalks  as  early  in  the  fall  as  prac- 
ticable, and,  if  possible,  plowing  the  cotton  fields  at  the  same  time. 

(5)  Trapping  the  last  weevils  in  the  field  by  means  of  a  few  plants 
left  standing. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  this  insect  may  become  the  most  serious 
enemy  to  the  cotton  plant  with  which  cotton  growers  in  this  country 
have  had  to  contend,  and  every  effort  should  be  made  to  prevent  its 
further  spread.  The  writer  believes  that  this  can  be  accomplished,  if, 
by  concerted  action  of  the  planters,  the  recommendations  just  made  are 
carried  out  throughout  the  infested  region. 


INSECTS  WHICH  AFFECT  THE  COTTON  PLANT.      343 
OTHER  COTTON  INSECTS. 

The  reports  of  the  Entomological  Commission  and  the  report  by 
Comstock,  published  by  this  Department  in  1879,  treated  only  inci- 
dentally of  the  other  insects  which  affect  the  cotton  plant.  The  main 
endeavor  in  the  large  investigation  was  to  cover  the  ground  of  the  cot- 
ton worm;  even  the  bollworm  was  considered  as  of  minor  importance. 
In  fact,  the  only  consideration  given  to  the  subject  of  the  other  insect 
enemies  of  this  crop  has  been  the  description  of  a  few  species  by 
Glover  in  several  of  the  earlier  reports  of  this  Department,  and  in  his 
copper-engraved  folio  entitled  u  Cotton  insects."  The  writer  has  com- 
piled a  list  of  the  insects  found  in  cotton  fields  and  which  are  men- 
tioned in  the  reports  of  Glover,  in  the  bulletins  and  special  reports  of 
the  Division  of  Entomology,  in  Bulletin  3  and  the  Fourth  Report  of 
the  Entomological  Commission,  together  with  those  mentioned  in  the 
notebooks  of  the  Division  of  Entomology  and  of  the  United  States 
Entomological  Commission,  and  has  added  to  this  list  the  species  men- 
tioned in  the  monthly  reports  of  the  statistical  division  of  this  Depart- 
ment, those  collected  by  Ashmead  in  Mississippi  in  the  summer  of 
1893,1  those  collected  by  Barnard  in  Louisiana  in  1879-80,  and  those 
collected  by  Mally  in  Mississippi  and  Louisiana  in  1890-91,  together 
with  a  few  collected  by  Banks  in  Louisiana  in  1891. 

The  list  as  a  whole  comprises  about  ±6o  species.  A  small  proportion 
of  these,  however,  can  be  considered  as  injurious  to  the  cotton  plant, 
and  still  smaller  numbers  have  attracted  the  attention  of  cotton 
planters  through  their  injuries  to  the  crop.  Many  of  them  are  para- 
sitic or  predaceous  upon  species  which  damage  the  plant  to  a  greater  or 
less  extent,  while  many  others  are  accidental  visitors  to  the  cotton  fields, 
and  might  have  been  collected  as  readily  in  fields  of  corn  or  cowpeas  in 
the  same  general  locality.  Some  little  consideration,  however,  may  be 
given  here  to  certain  species  which  occasionally  accomplish  considerable 
damage. 

CUTWORMS. 

The  first  insect  which  attacks  the  young  cotton  plant  in  the  spring  is 
liable  to  be  a  cutworm.  Soon  after  the  young  plants  come  up,  and  often 
after  they  are  fairly  well  grown,  they  are  liable  to  be  cut  off  at  the  sur- 
face of  the  ground  by  one  of  these  caterpillars,  all  of  which  have  the 
habit  of  hiding  beneath  the  surface  of  the  ground  by  day  and  coining 
out  to  work  at  night.  The  work  of  these  insects  in  general  was  fre- 
quently mentioned  by  Glover,  but  the  species  were  not  determined.  In 
Biley's  report  as  Entomologist  to  this  Department  for  1881,  the  subject 
of  cutworms  in  cabbage  fields  received  careful  treatment,  and  the  state- 
ment was  incidentally  made  upon  page  291  that  the  granulated  cutworm 

■Certain  of  these  have  been  mentioned  by  Ashmead  in  his  articles  in  Insect  Life, 
Vol.  VII. 


344 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


Fig 


-Feltia  annexa:  a,  larva;  /,  pupa,  h,  moth — natu- 
ral size  (after  Riley). 


(the  larva  of  Feltia  annexa  Treitschke)  is  probably  the  most  common  of 
tlie  species  collectively  designated  by  Glover  as  the  "cotton  cutworm." 
This  species  is  illustrated  herewith.  A  number  of  other  species,  how- 
ever, are  undoubtedly  concerned  in  this  damage.  The  larv:e  of  Feltia 
malefida,  JSFoctua  c-nigrum,  Agrotis  ypsilon,  and  Plusia  rogationis  have 

been   found   to    have   similar 
habits. 

Since  the  discovery  of  the 
poisoned-trap  system,  there  is 
no  reason  why  land  should  be 
allowed  to  be  infested  by  cut- 
worms year  after  year.  Dr. 
A.  Oemler,  of  Wilmington 
Island,  Georgia,  the  author  of 
the  excellent  little  book  en- 
titled "Truck  farming  in  the 
South,"  had  been  for  some 
years  in  the  habit  of  scatter- 
s  uuu>,uoo  ui  gxdoo  Diuuugu  jiis  fields,  or  placing  here  and  there 
turnip  or  cabbage  leaves,  and  collecting  from  time  to  time  the  cutworms 
which  had  gathered  under  them.  At  the  suggestion  of  Professor  Eiley, 
in  1882  or  1883,  he  began  poisoning  these  vegetable  traps  with  paris 
green,  which  saved  the  trouble  of  examining  them  and  killing  the 
worms  by  hand.  The  method  proved 
perfectly  satisfactory,  and  has  since 
been  extensively  used  in  all  parts 
of  the  country.  An  innovation  was 
later  adopted  by  Prof.  A.  J.  Cook,  of 
Michigan,  who  poisoned  a  patch  of 
grass  with  a  broadcast  sprayer,  after- 
wards cutting  the  grass,  loading  it 
on  a  wagon,  and  pitching  it  with  a 
fork  in  little  bunches  here  and  there 
through  the  field.  Any  early  vege- 
tation may  be  used  in  this  way,  and 
extensive  fields  can  be  economically  rid  of  the  worms  before  most  crops 
show  themselves  above  ground. 


ing  bunches  of  grass  through  hi 


Fig.  2t. — Feltia  malefida:  a,  larva;/,  moth- 
ural  size  (after  Riley). 


PLANT   LICE. 


While  the  cotton  plant  is  yet  young  and  tender,  the  damage  which 
plant  lice  do  by  gathering  upon  the  young  shoots  and  tender  leaves 
and  curling  and  distorting  them  may  be  very  considerable.  The  species 
engaged  in  this  work  is  generally,  if  not  always,  Aphis  gossypii  Glover. 
Eecent  investigations  by  Mr.  Pergande,  of  this  division,  have  shown 
that  this  insect  is  identical  with  the  species  which  occurs  commonly 
through  the  South,  and  the  North,  too,  for  that  matter,  upon  melons 


INSECTS    WHICH   AFFECT    THE    COTTON   PLANT.  345 

and  cucumbers,  and  which  was  described  by  Ashmead  as  Aphis  citrulli, 
and  by  Prof.  S.  A.  Forbes  as  Aphis  cucumeris.  It  has  very  mauy  food 
plants,  as  has  been  shown  by  Pergande,  and  remedial  work,  except 
upon  the  crop  which  it  is  proposed  to  protect,  is  practically  out  of  the 
question.  In  other  words,  there  is  no  single  alternate  peiennial  food 
plant,  as  in  the  case  of  the  hop  aphis,  upon  which  the  insect  may  be 
destroyed  during  the  earlier  or  later  portion  of  the  year.  As  the  cotton 
plant  grows  larger  and  stronger,  the  work  of  the  cotton  aphis  becomes 
of  no  importance,  partly  through  the  hardier  condition  of  the  plant,  but 
also  through  the  fact  that  the  many  natural  enemies  of  the  lice  increase 
to  such  numbers  as  nearly  to  annihilate  them.  There  will  seldom  be, 
therefore,  any  necessity  for  the  application  of  remedies;  and,  indeed, 
as  nothing  can  be  done  except  to  sx>ray  with  a  dilute  kerosene-soap 
emulsion  or  a  resin  wash,  it  is  a  question  whether  it  will  not  pay  the 
cotton  grower  much  better  to  replant  the  damaged  spots. 

LEAF-FEEDING    CATERPILLARS. 

There  are  many  Lepidopterous  larvae  which  feed  upon  the  leaves  of 
the  cotton  plant;  few  of  them,  however,  are  confined  to  the  cotton  plant 
for  food.  One  of  the  species  most  commonly  noticed,  Caccecia  rosaceana, 
is  known  from  its  work  as  the  leaf  roller — a  title  under  which  another 
species,  DicheUa  sulphureana,  may  also  be  included.  Both  species  are 
general  feeders  and  are  found  in  various  parts  of  the  country,  the  for- 
mer upon  apple,  rose,  peach,  cherry,  birch,  clover,  honeysuckle,  beans, 
strawberries,  and  other  plants,  and  the  latter  upon  clover  and  grass. 
The  larvre  of  the  former,  in  addition  to  folding  the  leaves  of  cotton  and 
feeding  within  the  roll,  sometimes  bore  into  the  young  bolls  (Mally), 
but  this  method  of  damage  is  rare. 

Several  of  the  larger  Bombycids  also  feed  in  the  larval  state  upon  cot- 
ton. Among  these  we  may  mention  the  large  royal  horned  caterpillar, 
Citheronia  regalis,  sometimes  known  as  the  "Hickory  Horned  Devil," 
a  very  large,  green  caterpillar  with  long  recurved  red  horns;  the  large 
green,  somewhat  hairy  larva  of  the  imperial  moth  (Eacles  imperialis) ; 
and  the  large  spiny  larva  of  Ecpantheria  scribo7iia,  as  well  as  the  yel- 
low-green stinging  caterpillar  of  the  Io  moth,  Hyperchiria  io,  and  the 
"woolly  bear"  caterpillars  of  Leucarctia  acra?a,  Spilosoma virginica,  and 
Arctia  phyllira.  The  last-named  species  seems  to  possess  greater  capa- 
bilities for  damage  than  any  of  the  others,  and  H.  E.  Weed  has  reported 
a  case  in  which  several  acres  were  entirely  defoliated  by  it  about  the 
middle  of  June,  in  Mississippi.1 

Two  bagworms  are  also  occasionally  found  feeding  upon  cotton 
leaves,  constructing  their  cases  from  fragments  of  the  leaves  sewed 
together  with  silk.  These  are  the  common  bagworm  of  the  North, 
Tliyridoptery.v  ephemercvformis,  and  Abbot's  bagworm,  a  southern 
species  (Oiketicus  abbotii). 

'Insect  Life,  Vol.  V,  p.  111. 


346 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


Late  in  the  fall  the  common  grass  worm,  or  fall  army  worm  (larva  of 
Laphygma  frugiperda),  ranges  through  the  cotton  fields,  feeding  upon 
volunteer  grass,  and  occasionally  ragging  the  leaves  of  the  cotton 
plant.  Two  allied  native  species,  viz,  Prodenia  commelince  and  P.  fiavi- 
media,  also  occasionally  feed  upon  cotton  leaves. 

The  larva  of  the  handsome  little  butterfly  known  as  Thecla  poeas 
feeds  upon  the  leaves  and  occasionally  bores  into  the  bolls. 

The  larvae  of  Acronycta  oblinita  and  Anisota  senatoria  have  also  been 
found  by  Mally  engaged  in  this  work. 

In  a  limited  section  of  the  country,  namely,  in  portions  of  Texas  and 
the  Indian  Territory,  the  so-called  garden  webworm,  Pyrausta  rantalis, 
occasionally  does  some  damage  to  the  cotton  crop,  as  it  did  in  1885. 
Feeding  principally  upon  corn,  its  injury  to  cotton  is  incidental,  yet  it 
may,  in  the  early  part  of  the  season  particularly,  do  some  little  damage 
to  this  crop.  Its  preference  for  corn  is  noticed  mainly  when  fields  over- 
run with  pigweed  and  careless  weed  (Amarantus  spp.)  are  broken  up 
for  planting,  and,  in  fact,  these  weeds  seem  to  be  its  natural  food.     It 

will  probably  never  do  serious 
damage  to  cultivated  crops,  except 
where  these  weeds  have  been  al- 
lowed to  run  wild  for  a  season  or 
so  and  are  then  plowed  under  and 
the  land  planted  to  some  useful 
crop.  The  small  green  caterpil- 
lars feed  upon  the  leaves,  conceal- 
ing themselves  between  them 
during  the  day  and  skeletonizing 
them  at  night. 
The  remedy  for  any  or  all  of  these 
leaf  feeding  caterpillars,  whenever  one  of  them  occasionally  becomes  so 
abundant  as  to  threaten  damage,  as  happened  with  the  Arctia  pliyllira 
above  mentioned,  will  be  to  spray  with  paris  green,  or  dust  it  on  dry, 
as  for  the  cotton  caterpillar. 

OTHER   INSECTS   WHICH   DAMAGE    THE    LEAVES. 

Among  the  other  insects  which  injure  the  foliage  of  the  cotton  plant, 
grasshoppers  are  the  most  prominent.  Several  species  have  this  habit, 
and  the  list  of  cotton  insects  contains  the  names  of  fourteen  which  are 
found  upon  the  plant.  Here  also  the  damage  to  cotton  seems  incidental ; 
they  feed  by  preference  upon  grass.  The  species  which  ordinarily 
cause  the  greatest  alarm  among  cotton  planters  are  the  large  American 
locust  (IScMstocerca  americana)  and  the  lubber  grasshopper  (Bracliystola 
magna).  The  x>aris  green  treatment  will  again  be  effective  here,  but 
when  grasshoppers  occur  in  considerable  numbers,  attracting  them  to 
patches  of  a  mash  made  of  sweetened  bran  and  arsenic  will  prevent 
leaf  feeding  to  a  great  extent. 

Many  leaf  hoppers  and  several  leaf-feeding  beetles  have  been  found 


Fig.  25. — Pyrausta  rantalis:  a,  larva,  enlarged;  &, 
side  view  of  abdominal  segment  of  same;  c,  dor- 
sal View  of  anal  segment,  still  more  enlarged ; 
d,  pupa;  /,  moth,  enlarged  (after Riley). 


INSECTS  WHICH  AFFECT  THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


347 


upon  the  cotton  plant,  but  need  not  be  particularly  mentioned  bere. 
In  many  portions  of  Texas  tbe  leaves  are  frequently  cut  off  by  the  so- 
called  leaf-cutting  ant,  (Ecodoma  fervens.  One  of  the  few  practical 
remedies  against  this  destructive  insect,  which  damages  fruit  trees  and 
other  field  crops  as 
well  as  cotton,  con- 
sists in  tracing  the 
auts  to  their  nest 
(which  is  often  an 
extremely  difficult 
thing  to  do)  and  de- 
stroying them  there 
by  copious  applica- 
tions of  kerosene  or 
bisulphid  of  carbon. 
Another  method, 
which  has  been  prac- 
ticed with  some  success  by  an  intelligent  Texan,  is  to  spread  a  line  of 
cyanid  of  potassium  across  the  well-defined  path  by  which  the  ants 
leave  their  nest.  This  kills  very  many,  and  deters  the  ants  from  taking 
the  direction  of  the  particular  path  thus  obstructed. 


Fir;.  26. — ScMstocerca  americana:    adult  female— natnral  size   (from 
Insect  Life). 


INSECTS    DAMAGING    THE    STALK. 


Puncturing  of  the  terminal  portion  of  the  stalk  by  plant  bugs  occa- 
sionally occurs,  but  is  comparatively  rare.     There  is  but  one  borer  in 


Fig.  27. — Cotton  stalk  borer  (Ataxia  crypta):  a,  larva  from  above;  b,  larva  from 
side;  c,  tunneled  cotton  stalk  showing  exit  hole;  d,  adult  beetle — all  enlarged 
except  c  (original). 


the  stalks  of  cotton,  and  that  is  the  long-horned  beetle  known  as  Ataxia 
crypta  (fig.  27).     It  is  occasionally  mistaken  for  an  enemy  to  the  plant, 


348 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


but  investigation  lias  shown  that  it  lays  its  eggs  upon,  and  its  larva}  bore 
into,  only  such  stalks  as  have  been  damaged  by  some  other  cause,  such 
as  rust.     It  follows  injury  to  the  plant,  therefore,  rather  than  causes  it. 

INSECTS   INJURING    THE   BOLL. 

As  in  the  case  of  the  stalk  borer  just  mentioned,  numerous  species 
of  insects  are  found  in  damaged  bolls  which  are  the  result,  rather  than 
the  cause,  of  the  damage.  Several  little  Mtidulid  beetles  are  found  in 
such  injured  bolls,  and  a  number  of  other  insects  have  been  sent  to  the 
Division  of  Entomology  of  this  Department  from  time  to  time  with  the 

statement  that  they  threat- 
ened damage  to  the  crop. 
Among  these  the  larva  of  a 
little  weevil,  Arwocerus  fas- 
ciculatus,  deserves  especial 
mention  for  the  reason  that 
it  so  closely  resembles  the 
larva  of  the  Mexican  cot- 
lon-boll  weevil.  In  fact,  the 
larvre  of  both  species  are 
found  living  in  the  same 
boll.  Arceocvrtisfasciculatus 
is  a  cosmopolitan  insect  liv- 
ing in  the  pods  of  various 
plants,  among  others  in 
those  of  the  coffee  plant  in 
Brazil,  but  is  never  known 
to  attack  healthy  plants. 
The  perfect  weevil  is  also 
among  the  various  insects 
which  are  mistaken  by  the 
planters  for  the  Mexican 
cotton-boll  weevil,  but  its 
very  short  and  blunt  beak 
should  at  once  distinguish 
it  from  the  latter  species.  Aside  from  the  true  bollworm,  several  of 
the  caterpillars  found  upon  the  plant  will  occasionally  gnaw  the  bolls, 
but  this  gnawing  is  in  general  incidental  to  their  work  upon  the  leaves. 
One  of  these  is  a  leaf  roller,  the  larva  of  Platynota  sentana,  which 
attacks  the  forms  and  squares,  much  like  the  young  bollworm,  after- 
wards feeding  upon  the  leaves.  A  congeneric  species  (Platynota  ros- 
trana)  also  bores  into  the  young  bolls.  The  reddish  larva  of  a  little 
Tineid  moth  belonging  to  a  group  mostly  composed  of  leaf  miners,  and 
known  as  Batrachedra  rileyi,  is  often  found  in  the  young  bolls,  and  is 
generally  believed  by  planters  to  act  independently  of  bollworm  dam- 
age. This  statement,  however,  has  not  yet  been  satisfactorily  substan- 
tiated so  far  as  it  refers  to  the  bolls.  In  the  young  squares,  however, 
the  active  little  reddish  larva  of  this  Batrachedra  is  very  often  found 
as  unquestionably  an  original  inhabitant,  and  it  undoubtedly  frequently 


Fig.  28.  -Homalodisca  coagulata:  a,  adult  female  seen  from 
above;  &,  same,  side  view;  c,  venation  of  forewing,  en- 
larged; d,  antenna;  e,  section  of  bind  tibia;  /,  female  gen- 
italia, still  more  enlarged ;  g,  serrations  of  ovipositor,  still 
more  enlarged  (from  Insect  Life). 


INSECTS  WHICH  AFFECT  THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


349 


causes  quite  an  extensive  shedding  of  the  squares.  This,  however, 
occurs  only  in  the  spring,  at  a  time  when  there  is  a  surplus  of  bloom 
and  when  many  squares  can  be  spared  without  great  reduction  of  the 
crop.  Later  in  the  season  the  Batrachedra  larva  is  found  boring  in  the 
unopened  flower  heads  of  various  weeds. 

There  is  a  class  of  damage  to  the  bolls  which  is  known  to  planters 
as  "sharpshooter  work,"  which  is  mainly  caused  by  the  punctures  of  a 
leaf  hopper  known  as  Homalodisca  coagulata.1  The  insect  is  most  abun- 
dant from  the  first  of  June  on  through  the  season.  Prior  to  the  first  of 
June  it  seems  to  prefer  the  young  growth  and  foliage  of  poplars  and 
other  trees  which  may  grow  in  the  immediate  vicinity.  Where  sharp- 
shooter work  is  prevalent  in  the  cotton  field,  year  after  year,  and  the 
trees  which  harbor  the  insects  can  be  found  in  the  early  part  of  the 


ITig.  29. — The  red  bug,  or  cotton  stainer  (Dysdercus  suturellus):  a,  pupa; 
6,  adult. — enlarged  (from  Insect  Life). 

season,  a  single  application  of  kerosene  emulsion  to  the  lower  parts  of 
such  trees  or  scrub  growth  might  be  made  to  advantage  in  the  month 
of  May. 

An  insect  which  at  one  time  did  very  considerable  damage  to  cotton 
bolls,  particularly  those  which  were  far  advanced  or  had  burst,  is  the 
red  bug  or  cotton  stainer,  Dysdercus  suturellus.  This  insect  was  never 
prevalent  except  in  Florida,  Georgia,  and  neighboring  portions  of 
South  Carolina  and  Alabama.  It  is  probably  a  West  Indian  species* 
Of  late  years,  and  more  especially  since  cotton  culture  in  Florida  has 
given  place  to  extensive  orange  culture,  it  has  largely  transferred  its 
attention  to  the  orange  fruit.2  Earlier  generations  of  this  insect  dam- 
aged the  bolls  by  puncturing  them  and  sucking  the  sap,  causing  them 
to  become  diminutive  or  abortive.  Later,  however,  they  entered  open 
bolls,  puncturing  the  seed  and  damaging  the  fiber  by  their  yellowish 
excrement.     These  stains  were  indelible  and  greatly  depreciated  the 


1  Insect  Life,  Vol.  V,  pp.  150-154. 


-Insect  Life,  Vol.  I,  pp.  234-242. 


350  THE    COTTON    PLANT.  ' 

value  of  the  cotton  in  the  market.  The  indelibility  and  beautiful  color 
of  the  stains  at  one  time  suggested  the  use  of  the  insects  in  making  dyes. 
Experiments  showed  that  the  entire  substance  of  the  insect  could  be 
converted  into  a  rich  orange-yellow  dye,  which  could  be  readily  fixed 
upon  woolens  or  silks  by  the  alum  mordant  liquor,  and  that  an  ochreous 
yellow  lake  conld  be  made  from  them  by  precipitating  the  coloring  mat- 
ter with  gelatinous  alumina.  There  has  been,  however,  no  commercial 
adoption  of  the  results  of  these  experiments. 

The  best  remedy  against  this  species  is  suggested  by  the  fact  that 
in  winter  it  will  collect  in  numbers  on  piles  of  cotton  seed,  which  can 
then  be  used  as  traps  and  the  insects  destroyed  by  the  application  of 
but  water. 


THE  HANDLING  ANI)  USES  OF  COTTON. 

By  Harry  Hammond. 
STALKS. 

The  stubble  left  on  an  average  acre  after  the  cotton  has  been  picked 
weighs  about  850  pounds,  and  where  a  bale  to  the  acre  is  made  more 
than  three  times  that  much.  The  leaves,  however,  will  have  been 
killed  by  frost  before  the  picking  season  closes,  and  will  have  fallen 
from  the  stalks,  so  that  200  pounds  must  be  deducted  on  this  account. 
Many  of  the  pods  or  capsules  which  held  the  cotton  will  also  have  been 
broken  off  and  scattered.  The  stalks,  roots,  and  capsules  standing  on 
an  acre  that  produces  one-third  of  a  bale  will  be  600  pounds.  Where 
the  cultivated  land  is  fenced,  it  is  the  practice  to  turn  the  stock  in  to 
pasture  on  this  stubble.  They  strip  off  the  limbs  and  pods,  so  that  by 
the  first  of  February  there  is  nothing  left  standing  but  the  bare  stalks, 
which  have  been  rendered  hard  and  brittle  by  the  cold.  Cattle  feed 
with  avidity  on  cotton  in  all  stages  of  its  growth,  and  until  the  weather 
has  left  the  dead  stalks  dry  and  unpalatable.  The  composition  of  the 
stalks  as  a  feeding  stuff  maybe  stated  as  follows:  Water,  10  per  cent; 
ash,  5.23;  protein,  9.54;  cellulose,  40.77;  nitrogen-free  extract,  32.63, 
and  fat,  1.83.  This  places  it  as  a  feeding  stuff  in  the  group  of  coarse, 
dry  fodders,  such  as  corn  shucks,  corn  stover,  and  rye,  oat,  and  wheat 
straw.  If  gathered  early  and  chopped  up,  it  would  grade  with  cotton- 
seed hulls,  having  more  protein  but  less  fat. 

Other  uses  have  been  proposed  for  the  stubble.  A  process  for  decor- 
ticating the  stalks  and  roots  and  extracting  fiber  from  them  has  been 
patented.  The  decorticating  machine,  consisting  of  two  grooved-iron 
rollers,  rotating  in  a  peculiar  way  above  a  trough  containing  water, 
is  worked  in  the  cotton  field,  where  the  stalks  may  be  fed  to  it  with- 
out the  cost  of  transporting  this  bulky  material.  The  bark  is  separated 
and  delivered  by  itself,  and  the  remainder  of  the  stalk  is  ground  into  a 
coarse-grained  pulp.  Five  tons  of  stalks  yield  1  ton  of  bark,  which 
is  either  baled  or  carried  in  bulk  to  the  machine  for  extracting  the 
fiber.  A  ton  of  bark  gives  1,500  pounds  of  fiber,  which  is  extracted 
at  a  cost  of  1£  cents  per  pound  in  the  actual  experiments.  With  more 
complete  arrangements  this  cost  would  be  very  greatly  reduced.  The 
fiber  has  been  made  into  bagging  for  cotton  bales,  pronounced  by 
dealers  in  that  article  to  be  of  first  quality.     It  might  also  be  utilized 

351 


352  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

in  the  manufacture  of  carpets,  rags,  etc.1  An  important  point  to  be 
determined  is  whether  the  residue,  after  the  bark  is  removed,  can  be 
used  as  stock  feed.  If  fed  as  it  comes  from  the  decorticator,  it  would 
seem  well  adapted,  by  the  admixture  of  cotton-seed  meal,  for  this  pur- 
pose; but  it  is  not  known  whether  the  water  used  in  the  process  will 
prevent  it  from  being  stored  for  future  use.  If  it  could  be  so  used, 
then  every  bale  of  cotton  would  yield  in  the  stubble  a  by-product  of 
1,440  pounds  of  coarse  fodder  and  270  pounds  of  fiber,  sufficient  to 
cover  20  bales  of  cotton. 

SEED    COTTON. 


After  cotton  was  picked  it  was  the  custom  in  earlier  days  to  store  it 
for  a  longer  or  shorter  time  in  houses  built  for  this  purpose  in  the 
fields.  These  cotton  houses  are  no  longer  to  be  seen,  except  some 
small  ones  with  a  capacity  of  2  to  3  bales  of  seed  cotton,  in  the  fields 
allotted  to  small  tenants  and  croppers  in  the  Western  States.  These 
houses  had  replaced  the  pens  in  which  cotton  was  once  kept  exposed  to 
the  weather  until  time  could  be  spared  to  move  it  to  the  gin.  Except 
occasionally  in  Texas,  cotton  is  no  longer  left  in  the  field  after  being 
picked;  there  the  very  dry  seasons  render  such  exposure  less  injurious 
than  it  would  be  elsewhere.  But  even  there  cotton  will  more  frequently 
be  found  stored  in  a  covered  wagon  in  the  field  until  the  wagon  is  filled 
and  ready  to  be  carried  to  the  gin.  Outside  of  the  damage  that  would 
result  from  the  greater  rainfall,  this  practice  could  not  be  followed  in 
the  eastern  portion  of  the  cotton  belt,  on  account  of  the  stealing  Avhich 
would  occur  if  cotton  were  left  exposed  in  this  manner.  So  great  has 
this  evil  been  at  times  that  several  States  have  found  it  necessary  to 
prohibit  the  sale  and  purchase  of  seed  cotton,  or  to  restrict  it  to  the 
hours  between  sunrise  and  sunset,  to  prevent  its  being  done  under  the 
cover  of  night.  By  storing  the  green  cotton  in  bulk  a  slight  heating 
was  produced,  which  caused  the  oil  contained  in  the  seed  to  impart  a 
creamy  glossiness  to  the  fiber.  This  heating,  carried  to  a  certain  point, 
seems  to  develop  the  oil  in  the  seed,  and  oil-mill  men  find  that  they  can 
obtain  more  oil  from  seed  so  treated.  Platforms  called  arbors  were 
once  built,  on  which  the  cotton  was  spread  out  in  the  sun  to  absorb  this 
oil  and  to  dry,  and  it  was  not  considered  ripe  for  the  gin  until  the  seed 
would  crack  and  not  mash  between  the  teeth.  Hands  were  employed 
to  pick  it  over  and  free  it  from  the  parts  of  leaves,  stems,  bolls,  and 
stained  locks  left  in  it  by  the  pickers.  Except  in  the  case  of  high- 
priced  Sea  Island  cotton,  all  this  has  been  abandoned  as  insufficiently 
remunerative.  The  large  piles  of  bolls  and  fragments  of  stalks  to  be 
observed  at  the  western  oil  mills  that  are  taken  from  the  seed  in  cleaning 

'The  preparation  of  cotton-stalk  fiber,  however,  has  not  thus  far  proved  practi- 
cally successful,  owing  largely,  if  not  entirely,  to  the  difficulty  of  devising  a  machine 
that  will  satisfactorily  work  up  the  rough,  irregular  material.  SeeU.  S.  Dept.  Agr.; 
Office  of  Fiber  Investigations  Rpt.  6,  p.  17. 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON. 


353 


them  testify  to  the  careless  picking  and  rough  handling  of  the  seed 
cotton.  This  does  not,  however,  seem  to  diminish  in  any  degree  the 
value  placed  upon  the  lint,  for,  as  a  rule,  the  western  staple  is  graded 
high.  The  moisture  in  the  seed  of  the  first  pickings  is  much  com- 
plained of  by  the  manufacturers  of  oil,  as  its  drying  out  causes  a  con- 
siderable shrinkage  in  weight.  A  similar  objection  does  not  apply  to 
the  lint.  The  draft  of  air  from  the  gin  dries  it  so  completely  that  the 
subsequent  loss  in  weight  is  very  small.  The  cotton  grower  sometimes 
finds  that  he  does  not  recover  in  the  seed  and  lint  that  comes  from  the 
gin  t^e  original  weight  of  his  seed  cotton  by  as  much  as  10  per  cent. 
In  other  words,  1,500  pounds  of  seed  cotton,  when  green,  is  known  to 
have  lost  something  over  150  pounds  in  being  ginned.  Some  of  this 
loss  may  be  due  to  the  impalpable  dust  that  was  blown  off,  but  the  balk 
of  it  is  caused  by  the  moisture  in  the  lint  that  is  dried  out  by  the  blast 
from  the  gin.  It  is  claimed  by  cotton  buyers  that  there  should  be  a 
concession  in  price  on  account  of  loss  of  weight  from  drying  out  in  cot- 
ton offered  for  sale  early  in  the  season.  The  fact  above  stated  would 
show  that  there  was  little  ground  for  this  demand.  As  further  evidence 
of  the  slight  loss  occasioned  by  drying  out,  it  may  be  mentioned  that 
7  bales  of  cotton,  weighing  at  the  ginhouse  3,781  pounds,  weighed  3,741 
pounds  after  nineteen  months'  storage.  The  loss,  therefore,  was  less 
than  1  per  cent,  or  less  than  one-third  of  a  pound  per  month,  notwith- 
standing that  samples  had  been  repeatedly  drawn  from  them.  Practi- 
cally this  amounts  to  no  loss,  and  ginned  cotton  under  ordinary 
circumstances  is  one  of  the  least  perishable  crops.  The  allowance 
made  in  the  guaranty  of  weights  by  the  New  York  Cotton  Exchange 
may  be  considered  ample.  It  is  half  a  pound  to  the  bale  a  month  for 
twelve  months. 

Of  late  years  the  effort  has  been  to  carry  the  cotton  to  the  gin  as 
rapidly  as  possible,  and  to  put  it  on  the  market  with  the  least  delay. 
The  rate  at  which  the  crop  is  ginned  and  brought  into  sight  will  be 
seen  from  the  following  table.1 

Average  percentage  of  the  cotton  crop  brought  in  sight  at  the  end  of  different  quarters  of 

the  cotton  year. 


Period. 

• 

First 

quarter, 

Sept.  1  to 

Dec.  1. 

Second 
quarter, 
Dec.  1  to 

Mar.  1. 

Third 
quarter. 
Mar.  1  to 
June  1. 

1881  1883 

Per  cent. 
45.7 
52.9 
52.9 
51.6 

Per  cent. 
85.1 
90.6 
90.3 
87.9 

Per  cent. 
97.1 

1884  1886                                        

98.1 

1885  1888  .                                    

97.1 

1889  1891                      

97.9 

The  rapidity  of  the  movement  of  the  crop  would  be  more  marked  if 
figures  for  an  earlier  date  were  accessible,  especially  if  they  dated 
back  to  the  time  when  transportation  by  wagons  was  the  main  reliance. 

1  Condensed  from  U.  S.  Senate  Report  No.  986. 
1993— No.  33 23 


354  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

As  it  is,  the  increase  in  production  in  recent  years  lias  gained  some- 
what on  the  growth,  great  as  it  has  been,  of  railroads,  and  tbe  larger 
crops  come  somewhat  more  slowly  into  sight  on  this  account.  By  far 
the  larger  part  of  the  crop,  however,  has  passed  from  the  ginnery  by 
the  last  of  December,  and  an  enumeration  of  the  work  done  at  that 
date  would  give  a  very  complete  basis  for  an  estimate  of  the  crop. 


The  handling  of  cotton  in  the  field  and  thence  to  the  gin  was  formerly 
neater  than  it  is  now  and  the  ginning  also  was  in  several  regards  better 
done.  The  different  pickings  were  ginned  separately,  each  picking  on 
the  large  plantations  being  sufficient  to  make  a  run  for  the  gins,  and 
the  different  grades  of  cotton  were  thus  kept  distinct.  The  subdivi- 
sion of  farms  has  changed  this,  and  led  to  conditions  not  very  dis- 
similar to  those  described  by  Dr.  Watson  Forbes  in  his  report  on  gins 
in  India.     He  says: 

The  smallness  of  the  farms  in  India,  as  compared  with  the  American  cotton  plan- 
tations, is  at  the  root  of  the  evil.  In  India  there  are  few  ryots  (and  the  number  of 
cotton  growers  in  the  cotton  belt  of  this  class  have  grown  and  are  rapidly  growing 
much  fewer)  who  can  produce  at  one  picking  as  much  even  as  one  hale  of  cotton,  each 
hale  being  made  up  of  cotton  produced  by  several  ryots.  It  is  clear  that  under  such 
circumstances  the  difficulty  of  producing  cotton  of  uniform  quality  must  be  immensely 
increased. 

As  a  consequence,  says  Forbes,  "the  loss  occasioned  by  cleaning  the 
impurities  from  India  cotton  was  four  times  as  great  as  from  American 
uplands." 

In  the  old  ginhouse  the  lint  was  blown  from  the  gin  into  a  spacious 
lint  room,  where  another  separation  took  place,  the  dust-laden,  and 
consequently  heavier,  lint  falling  nearest  to  the  gin,  while  the  cleaner 
and  lighter  flocks  were  thrown  to  the  farther  side.  The  distinction 
between  these  piles  was  carefully  observed  in  baling  the  cotton. 

The  devices  for  separating  the  lint  from  the  seed  are  of  two  classes. 
The  first  class  is  known  as  roller  gins,  the  other  as  saw  gins.  The 
roller  gin  is  the  most  ancient.  It  was  used  from  the  earliest  times  by 
the  Hindoos.  In  its  simplest  form  it  consists  of  a  flat  stone,  on  which 
the  seed  cotton  was  placed,  and  a  wooden  roller,  moved  by  the  foot,  was 
employed  to  press  the  seed  out.  To  this  day  two  small  rollers,  a  foot 
long,  one  of  wood  and  the  other  of  iron,  geared  to  move  in  opposite 
directions  and  turned  by  hand,  are  used  in  India  to  separate  the  seed 
from  the  fiber.  The  task  is  5  pounds  of  clean  cotton  a  day,  and  the 
woman  who  performs  it  receives  a  daily  wage  of  5  cents.  In  Sicily,  also, 
two  grooved  wooden  cylinders,  turned  by  hand,  are  still  used  to  pinch 
out  the  seed.  In  the  Amoy  district  of  China  cotton  is  said  to  be  cleaned 
by  means  of  a  heavy  wooden  bow  suspended  from  a  bamboo  frame  on 
the  shoulders  of  the  operator,  who  feeds  the  cotton  along  a  board  with 
his  right  hand  and  with  his  left  strikes  it  with  the  string  of  his  bow, 
cleaning  from  50  to  100  pounds  a  day,  at  a  wage  of  10  cents.     The 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON.  355 

combination  of  the  roller  and  the  bowstring  beater  may  be  observed  in 
certain  of  the  modern  improved  roller  gins  used  for  cleaning,  the  long- 
staple  Sea  Island  cotton.  The  seed  cotton  is  fed  on  a  table  to  a  leather 
roller  (preferably  walrus  hide),  the  roughness  of  which  engages  the 
fiber,  while  a  steel  plate  in  close  juxtaposition  to  the  roller  prevents  the 
passage  of  the  seed  and  a  rapidly  vibrating  blade  knocks  them  out. 
The  cleaned  seed  fall  through  interstices  in  the  table,  and  the  lint  is 
delivered  on  the  farther  side  of  the  roller.  Only  cotton  with  naked 
seed  has  been  successfully  ginned  in  this  way,  the  down  on  ordinary 
upland  seed  causing  them  when  agitated  to  adhere  to  each  other  and 
prevents  them  from  falling  through  the  openings  on  the  table. 

The  construction  of  the  roller  gin  has  undoubtedly  been  greatly 
improved  in  recent  times,  especially  as  regards  the  ease  with  which  it 
is  worked  and  the  quantity  of  cotton  it  cleans,  but  it  is  doubtful  if  the 
quality  of  the  product  is  any  better  than  it  was  in  those  ancient  days 
when  the  Hindoos  extracted  with  it  the  delicate  fibers  with  which  they 
made  the  wonderful  tissues  called  the  "woven  wind." 

The  saw  gin  works  on  the  other  plan.  The  seed  cotton  is  held  in  a 
box,  one  side  of  which  is  a  grate  of  steel  bars  or  ribs.  Through  the 
intervals  of  the  grate  a  number  of  thin  steel  disks  notched  on  the  edge 
and  miscalled  saws  rotate  rapidly.  The  notches  or  teeth  of  the  saws 
engage  the  fiber  and  pull  it  from  the  seed.  The  seed  as  they  are  cleaned 
fall  to  the  floor  through  a  slit  below  the  ribs.  Behind  the  cylinder  hold- 
ing the  saws  is  another  and  a  larger  cylinder  (the  brush)  filled  with 
bristles  in  contact  with  the  saws.  Both  cylinders  rotate  in  the  same 
direction.  The  brush  sweeps  from  the  saws  the  fibers  they  have  de- 
tached, and  the  draft  created  by  the  rapid  revolutions  of  the  two 
cylinders  blows  the  lint  out  to  a  distance  of  20  to  60  feet  from  the  end 
of  the  gin,  opposite  to  the  one  into  which  the  seed  cotton  is  fed. 

The  defects  of  both  methods  of  ginning  are  much  the  same.  They 
fail  to  clean  the  lint  thoroughly  of  foreign  substances,  such  as  dust, 
fragments  of  leaves,  etc.  Some  of  the  seed,  especially  the  immature 
seed  known  as  motes,  pass  through  with  the  lint.  The  fibers  may  be 
strained,  weakened,  or  even  broken,  or  what  is  fully  as  bad,  crimped 
and  knotted  (termed  neps  or  naps)  by  improper  force  used  in  their 
removal.  From  all  these  causes  a  large  amount  of  waste  is  always 
found  in  ginned  cotton.  The  Willimantic  Thread  Company  estimated 
that  their  comber  removed  on  an  average  20  per  cent  of  such  waste  from 
the  high-priced  Sea  Island  cotton  used  by  them.  According  to  the 
report  on  textiles  by  the  Commissioner  of  Labor  (1891),  the  percentage 
of  waste  in  the  mills  making  returns  varied  from  12.78  to  22.87.  For 
32  Northern  mills  it  averaged  18.49  per  cent,  and  for  25  Southern  mills 
the  average  was  16.52  per  cent.  The  difference  is  probably  due  to 
injury  to  the  fiber  by  being  compressed  for  transportation.  The  waste 
from  yarn  to  the  finished  product  is  stated  as  4.81  per  cent. 

One  of  the  important  prerequisites  for  improvement  in  ginned  cotton 


356  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

is  some  more  accurate  method  of  determining  its  quality  and  a  willing- 
ness on  the  part  of  purchasers  to  pay  the  difference  between  fairly  and 
thoroughly  well-handled  cotton.  Notwithstanding  the  numerous  grades 
in  which  cotton  is  classified,  their  determination  is  practically  a  rule-of- 
thumb  matter,  and  samplers  will  be  found  to  classify  and  price  the  same 
sample  very  differently.  A  few  ounces  out  of  a  500  pound  bale  is  taken 
in  the  hand,  opened,  and  the  fibers  pulled  ont  between  the  thumb  and 
forefinger,  and  the  classification  decided.  For  many  points  it  is  suffi- 
cient; the  length  of  the  staple  is  observed  in  a  general  way,  its  color,  its 
strength,  and  its  freedom  from  dirt  and,  so  far  as  the  sample  goes,  from 
motes  and  seed  and  leaf.  The  sampler  knows  that  there  are  severe  laws 
against  fraudulently  packed  cotton ;  that  the  contents  of  the  bale  will 
not  differ  widely  from  the  sample  he  has  examined,  and  if  it  should, 
that  the  marks  on  the  bale  will  enable  the  x>urchaser  to  trace  it  back  to 
the  producer  and  make  reclamation.  Nevertheless,  no  sampler  will  ven- 
ture to  say  whether  the  bale  he  has  examined  will  suffer  a  waste  of  10 
or  of  25  per  cent  from  short  or  weak  fibers,  dust,  motes,  or  neps.  The 
experience  of  many  farmers  has  convinced  them  that  they  get  as  much 
in  the  market  for  the  closely  ginned  short  fibers  and  the  dust  as  they 
do  for  good  staple,  and  they  object  to  having  these  impurities  removed. 
The  very  loose  methods  used  by  purchasers  in  determining  the  value  of 
lint  cotton  is  illustrated  by  the  statement  of  a  large  manufacturer,  who 
had  had  some  years'  experience  in  disposing  of  Florida  long  staples. 
He  says : 

Some  of  it  was  saw  ginned  and  some  of  it  was  roller  ginned.  The  roller  ginned 
retained  all  of  the  trash  and  some  of  the  seed.  The  saw  ginned  was  free  of  seed 
and  every  way  cleaner  than  that  ginned  on  the  roller  gin.  Still,  that  ginned  on  the 
roller  gin  sold  for  6  cents  per  pound  higher.  I  argued  the  point  with  the  buyers, 
affirming  that  the  saw  ginned  was  not  cut  and  was  really  the  most  valuable  on 
account  of  its  freedom  from  seed  and  trash,  and  proved  it  to  them  with  the  micro- 
scope. Their  only  reply  was,  "We  think  you  are  right,  but  our  orders  are  to  pay  so 
much  for  that  ginned  on  the  roller  gin,"  and  they  acted  as  per  orders.  I  wrote  to 
my  customers  these  facts.  Their  objection  to  the  roller  gin  was  that  it  was  too  slow, 
and  they  fell  upon  the  plan  of  using  the  saw  gin,  and  after  ginning  to  pass  the  lint 
through  a  whipper,  which  only  tangled  up  the  lint.  The  whipper  gave  it  the 
appearance  of  having  beeu  ginned  on  the  roller  gin  (except  the  trash  and  seed), 
and  the  buyers  took  it  as  roller  ginned  and  paid  the  higher  price  for  it.1 

In  the  days  of  the  large  cotton  plantations  much  cotton  was  better 
handled  than  it  is  now.     The  packages  were  smaller  and  neater.     It 

iln  a  paper  entitled  "Treatise  upon  the  cotton  fiber  and  its  improvement,"  sub- 
mitted at  a  meeting  of  the  New  England  Cotton  Manufacturers'  Association  at 
Atlanta,  Ga.,  October,  1895,  Edward  Atkinson,  referring  to  the  use  of  the  saw  gin, 
says:  "We  take  three-quarters  of  the  life  out  of  our  cotton  by  our  murderous 
method  of  treating  it.  We  nearly  wear  it  out  before  we  begin  to  weave  it."  And 
asks,  "Would  it  not  be  better  to  nip  these  fibers  between  two  elastic  rolls,  to  draw 
them  away  from  the  seed  without  upsetting,  tangling,  and  cutting  them?"  He 
argues  at  length  in  favor  of  the  more  extended  cultivation  of  long-staple  varieties, 
and  of  more  earnest  efforts  to  improve  the  roller  gin,  using  the  latter  in  connection 
with  the  recently  introduced  cylinder  press  (see  p.  362). 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON.  357 

was  picked  with  greater  care.  The  name  of  the  grower  in  full,  with 
that  of  the  plantation  on  which  it  was  grown,  was  put  on  each  bale, 
and  was  a  guaranty  of  its  quality.  In  addition,  other  brands  were 
added,  indicating  the  exact  quality  of  the  cotton,  which  was  sold  some- 
times by  their  brands  as  wines  are.  Of  course,  with  the  increased 
multitude  of  small  cotton  growers  this  has  passed  away  as  impracti- 
cable. After  being  stored  and  sunned  as  described  above,  the  cotton, 
when  necessary,  was  often  passed  through  machines  known  as  openers, 
whippers,  and  thrashers,  in  which  the  cotton  was  tossed  about  and 
subjected  to  a  draft  of  air  to  remove  trash  and  dust.  The  separation 
of  the  clean  and  dusty  cotton  in  the  large,  old-fashioned  lint  room  has 
been  referred  to.  The  clumsy  old  compass  press,  where  an  elm-wood 
screw  2  feet  in  diameter  and  12  feet  long  was  run  down  on  the  cotton 
by  three  mules  attached  to  levers,  with  a  sweep  of  30  feet,  made  a  neat 
package,  but  one  open  to  the  objection  of  being  bound  in  ropes.  In 
case  of  fire  the  ropes  would  burn,  and  the  bale,  bursting  open,  would 
scatter  the  fire.  The  old  gins  were  run  by  horsepower  or  by  water; 
steam  was  not  used.  They  ginned  slower.  As  a  result,  except  in  very 
wet  cotton,  the  fiber  was  never  cut  or  broken ;  nor  was  it  crimped  or 
knotted  by  the  impact  of  the  saws  as  when  the  cylinder  rotates  at  a 
speed  greater  than  400  revolutions  per  minute.  The  movement  of  the 
saws  through  the  seed  cotton  held  by  the  grate  in  the  roll  box, 
imparts  to  it  a  rotary  motion  in  the  direction  opposite  to  that  in 
which  the  saws  are  moving.  This  is  called  the  roll.  A  low  speed 
gives  a  loose  roll;  a  high  speed  gives  a  closer  and  more  compact  one. 
The  higher  speed  and  closer  roll  does  the  largest  amount  of  work,  and 
by  cleaning  the  seed  more  thoroughly  increases  the  quantity  of  the 
product.  At  the  same  time,  this  high  speed  strains  and  breaks  more 
of  the  fibers,  adds  by  its  close  cleaning  to  the  number  of  short  fibers, 
and  often  nips  off  fragments  of  the  seed,  all  of  which  goes  to  swell  the 
percentage  of  waste.  The  motes,  or  immature  seed  with  lint  attached, 
pass  through  the  breast  with  the  lint,  the  spaces  between  the  ribs  not 
being  close  enough  to  prevent  the  passage  of  such  small  bodies.  They 
are  swept  from  the  saws  by  the  brush,  but  their  exit  from  the  gin  with 
the  lint  is  prevented  by  an  adjustable  board  below  the  brush  that 
opens  or  closes  the  aperture  through  which  the  air  is  sucked  in  by  the 
revolution  of  the  cylinders.  If  the  opening  is  large,  the  great  draft 
carries  the  motes  through  with  the  lint;  if  small,  the  draft  is  less,  the 
heavier  motes  fall  under  the  gin,  and  only  the  lighter  lint  passes  on. 
•  With  the  subdivision  of  farms  an  almost  new  industry  was  developed 
in  the  way  of  toll  gins.  The  old  plantations  had  each  its  own  ginhouse, 
but  the  small  farms  could  not  bear  the  expense  of  such  a  plant,  and 
public  gins  became  a  necessity.  They  sprang  up  everywhere,  and,  as 
is  usual  in  the  trial  of  new  things,  were  cheaply  and  very  poorly  con- 
structed. The  first  thing  to  go  was  the  expensive  old  compass  press. 
It  was  replaced  by  hand-lever  presses  of  many  varieties.     The  old  lint 


358  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

room  soon  followed.  The  condenser  could  be  used  in  a  cheaper  build- 
ing, reduced  the  labor  of  handling  and  the  risk  from  fire,  and  it  was 
substituted  for  the  lint  room,  though  it  did  not  improve  the  quality  of 
the  product.  Steam  engines  were  used,  as  more  convenient  than  water 
power  and  as  doing  more  work  than  horsepower.  Very  soon  it  was 
thought  that  ginning  could  be  accomplished  like  wheat  threshing — by 
portable  machines.  A  number  of  plants,  consisting  of  a  portable 
engine  and  gin,  were  tried  for  a  year  or  two.  The  cost  of  maintaining 
teams  to  transport  the  outfit  to  where  only  a  few  bales  at  a  time  were 
ready  for  the  gin,  and  the  difficulty  of  arranging  for  a  supply  of  wood 
and  water  at  the  different  farms,  as  well  as  interruptions  of  work  done 
in  the  open  air  by  wet  weather,  made  portable  gins  unprofitable,  and 
they  have  been  abandoned. 

The  small  and  cheaply  constructed  ginhouse,  and  the  use  of  steam  in 
connection  with  it  as  the  motive  power,  has  been  a  prolific  source  of 
much  loss  by  fire.  Like  most  other  establishments  engaged  in  manu- 
facture, the  tendency  is  toward  their  consolidation  and  enlargement. 
Ginneries,  with  a  capacity  of  50  to  75  bales  a  day,  are  becoming  quite 
numerous.  There  is  one  near  Waco,  Tex.,  which  it  is  claimed  will  turn 
out  250  bales  a  day.  The  obstacle  to  their  enlargement  is  the  difficulty  of 
transporting  such  bulky  material  as  seed  cotton,  requiring  three  times 
the  space  to  hold  it  and  three  times  the  power  to  move  it  that  lint  cotton 
does.  In  a  district  producing  G5  bales  to  the  square  mile,  the  maximum 
haul  to  keep  the  Waco  ginnery  in  full  work  would  be  about  10  miles. 
The  average  haul  would  be  much  less.  Where  facilities  for  ginning  and 
marketing  are  to  be  had,  cotton  in  the  seed  is  now  not  unfrequeutly 
hauled  11  and  even  12  miles.  Wagon  transportation  to  market  for  the 
lint  is  found  cheaper  than  railroad  carriage  up  to  20  to  25  miles. 

In  the  gin  itself  no  radical  change  or  improvement  has  taken  place 
since  the  days  of  Whitney,  its  inventor.  The  material  used  and  its 
construction  are  better,  but  the  recent  improvements  have  all  been  in 
the  superior  handling  of  cotton  at  the  gin.  The  system  of  elevating 
the  cotton  by  suction  has  been  used  about  fifteen  years,  and  has  been 
greatly  simplified  and  improved.  A  fan  blower  draws  a  current  of  air 
through  a  wood  or  metal  flue,  sucks  the  cotton  up  from  the  wagon  or 
bin  in  which  it  has  been  stored,  and  delivers  it  to  the  gin.  At  first  the 
cotton  was  allowed  to  pass  through  the  fan  on  its  way  to  the  gin.  The 
friction  in  the  fan  ignited  the  cotton,  and  fires  occurred.  Now  the  fan 
is  placed  on  the  farther  side  of  a  receiver,  where  a  screen  stops  the  cot- 
ton, but  allows  the  air,  with  the  dust  it  has  collected  from  the  cotton, 
to  pass  on  and  out  of  the  house.  From  the  receiver  the  cotton  is  deliv- 
ered by  a  revolving  roller  onto  a  belt,  which  deposits  it  in  the  feeders 
of  the  gins,  or  the  belt  may  be  dispensed  with  and  the  cotton  deliv- 
ered into  receptacles  of  sufficient  capacity  over  each  gin,  and  from 
there  it  is  automatically  deposited  in  the  feeders  of  the  gins.  A  single 
flue  for  all  the  gins,  or  sometimes  a  flue  for  each  gin,  made  of  wood  or 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON.  359 

metal,  conducts  the  lint  moved  by  the  blast  from  the  saw  and  brush 
cylinders  of  the  gin  to  a  condenser.  During  its  passage  through  this 
flue  the  lint  is  treated  iu  much  the  same  way  as  it  was  in  the  old  lint 
room.  The  current  of  air  straightens  out  the  fibers  crimped  by  the 
ginning,  the  heavier  sand  falls  into  a  pocket  arranged  to  receive  it  as 
the  lint  rises  to  the  condenser,  and  the  lighter  dust  is  blown  off  and 
escapes  from  the  building  through  flues  issuing  from  the  condenser. 
The  seed  meanwhile  fall  from  the  gin  into  a  screw  conveyor  (preferably 
with  a  perforated  bottom,  to  allow  the  escape  of  sand),  and  is  either 
delivered  directly  to  the  wagon  or  into  the  seed  house  or  dropped  into 
a  flue  from  the  blower,  which  transports  them  wherever  it  is  desired. 
From  the  condenser  the  lint  falls  into  a  press,  where  a  plunger,  worked 
directly  by  steam  or  by  other  power,  presses  it  down  as  may  be 
required.  When  the  box  is  filled  it  is  turned  round  over  the  screw  and 
packed,  while  another  box,  turned  under  the  condenser  by  the  same 
movement,  continues  to  receive  another  bale.  The  cotton  is  packed  by 
a  screw,  by  steam,  or  by  hydraulic  pressure,  according  to  the  character 
of  the  outfit.  The  battery  of  gins,  generally  four  in  number  for  each 
condenser  and  press,  stand  close  together,  and  may  be  stopped  instantly 
by  a  hand  brake  on  each,  which  slackens  the  driving  belt.  Under  this 
system  the  ginhouse  is  free  from  dust  and  lint,  a  great  nuisance  and 
greatly  increasing  the  risk  of  fire  in  the  ordinary  ginhouse.  All  the 
operations  are  carried  on,  as  it  were,  under  cover.  The  observer 
might  fail  to  see  cotton  anywhere  until  he  saw  the  lint  sliding  from  the 
condenser  into  the  press.  Steam  extinguishers  and  water  sprinklers 
are  found  in  well -arranged  ginhouses.  Seed  cotton — and  there  need 
never  be  as  much  of  it  as  a  bale  in  such  a  ginnery,  so  quickly  is  the 
work  of  receiving  and  cleaning  it  dispatched — while  easily  ignited, 
merely  flashes  over,  and  the  fire  goes  out.  When  orders  were  issued 
during  the  war  to  burn  cotton  the  task  was  found  to  be  not  an  easy 
one.  The  only  way  to  accomplish  it  was  found  to  be  to  set  fire  to  the 
building,  and  even  then  if  there  was  a  large  pile  of  cotton  much  of  it 
was  left  unconsumed.  It  is  different  with  lint  cotton.  When  once  on 
fire  it  will  burn  and  smolder  indefinitely.  A  burning  bale  when  thrown 
into  the  water  will  float  and  burn  until  all  of  it  is  destroyed.  But 
under  this  system  the  lint  passes  at  once  into  the  press,  and  should  it 
catch  fire  there  the  plunger  that  tramps  in  the  cotton  is  let  down  on  it 
and  smothers  the  fire  until  steps  are  taken  to  remove  and  extinguish 
it.  Risk  from  fire  is  for  these  reasons  at  a  minimum.  If  the  gin  can 
not  clean  the  cotton  as  it  is  hauled  in,  it  is  usual  to  store  it  in  a  sep- 
arate building  situated  at  some  distance  (100  feet  or  more)  from  the 
ginhouse.  The  bins  in  which  the  lot  of  each  owner  is  placed  are  each 
connected  with  the  flue  of  the  fan  blower  and  may  be  sucked  into  the 
gins  as  required.  These  improvements  have  greatly  reduced  the  labor 
required  to  operate  a  ginnery.  Under  the  old  methods  the  cotton  was 
unloaded  in  baskets  and  elevated  to  the  gin  by  hand.     This  employed 


360  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

the  time  of  one  hand  for  each  gin.  A  ginner  was  also  required  for 
each  gin,  and  another  hand  to  put  the  cotton  in  the  press  and  attend  to 
the  packing.  Three  hands  to  the  gin,  say  of  00  saws,  making  400  revo- 
lutions per  minute — the  speed  producing  the  best  staple — would  turn 
out  G  bales  in  a  day  of  10  hours.  With  the  suction  elevators  the  same 
number,  with  much  less  labor,  would  attend  4  or  5  gins  and  turn  out 
24  to  30  bales  in  the  same  time. 


While  the  standard  bale  is  54  by  27  inches  and  is  intended  to  con- 
tain nearly  500  pounds  on  the  average,  bales  actually  vary  greatly  in 
size  and  in  every  dimension,  and  to  a  still  greater  degree  as  regards  the 
density  of  their  contents.  This  adds  to  the  difficulty  of  storing  them 
on  shipboard  and  to  the  expense  of  handling  and  transportation. 
Loosely  packed  bales  are  liable  to  serious  damage  from  rain,  to  which 
they  are  always  more  or  less  exposed.  The  covering  is  of  such  coarse 
material  that  dust  and  rain  easily  penetrate  it  and  soil  the  cotton,  while 
the  size  of  the  bale  is  so  great  that  it  has  to  be  rolled  about  by  iron 
hooks  devised  for  the  purpose.  The  covering  is  torn  in  this  rough 
handling,  more  or  less  cotton  falls  out  and  is  lost,  and  the  exposed  lint 
is  fair  game  for  any  stray  spark  that  may  come  in  contact  with  it  (fig.  30). 
It  was  thought  that  these  evils  would  be  remedied  by  putting  up  the  lint 
in  smaller,  more  compact,  and  more  neatly  covered  and  protected  pack- 
ages. Some  years  ago  it  seemed  that  the  Dedrick  perpetual  press  had 
fully  met  all  of  these  requirements.  The  cotton  was  put  up  in  bales  of 
100  pounds  and  of  a  density  nearly  equal  to  that  obtained  by  the  com- 
presses. It  was  packed  one  section  at  a  time,  each  section  being  sub- 
jected to  exactly  the  same  pressure,  which  preserved  the  staple.  The 
Willimantic  Thread  Company  testified  that  "  the  cotton  so  compressed 
made  less  waste  at  the  picker,  in  the  cards,  and  in  the  combing  machine" 
than  the  long-staple  Sea  Island  cotton,  which  was  always  put  up  in 
loose,  round  bales  packed  by  hand  to  avoid  injuring  the  delicate  staple. 
The  press  was  used  to  some  extent,  and  the  New  England  mills  paid  a 
higher  price  for  cotton  packed  by  it.  But  dealing  in  these  bales  was 
only  practicable  directly  with  the  mills,  where,  in  addition  to  the  supe- 
riority of  the  staple,  their  storage  and  handling  were  found  easier  and 
more  convenient,  'hey  were  not  salable  in  the  open  market.  The 
practice  there  was  based  on  the  large  bale.  Numerous  charges  attached 
to  it  as  a  unit,  and  the  change  involved  was  too  great  a  revolution  in 
settled  customs.  It  is  noteworthy  that  with  the  increase  of  cotton  pro- 
duction the  size  and  weight  of  the  bale  has  grown.  The  American  bale 
has  grown  from  300  pounds  to  500  pounds.  In  States  producing  the 
largest  crops  the  bales  are  heaviest,  and  even  in  the  same  States  the 
weight  varies  as  the  yield  of  each  season  has  been  large  or  small.  The 
Egyptian  bale  averaged  only  245  pounds  in  1855.  With  the  greatly 
increased  production  it  weighed  714  pounds  in  1892.     In  Peru,  Brazil, 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON. 


361 


and  Persia  the  bales  ran  from  175  pounds  to  220  pounds.    In  Asiatic 
Russia  they  ran  from  250  pounds  to  325  pounds.    India  forms  an  excep- 


Indian  bale.  Turkish  bale. 

Fiq.  30. — Appearance  of  different  kinds  of  cotton  bales  on  arrival  at  Trieste,  Austria-Hungary  (from 
cuts  furnished  by  the  State  Department). 

tion,  the  392  pounds,  which  is  the  average  now  of  those  bales,  being 
only  10  pounds  more  than  the  average  weight  in  1856.     The  size  of  the 


362  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

Indian  bale  is  much  smaller  and  its  density  much  greater  than  that  of 
the  American  bale.  It  weighs  39  pounds  to  the  cubic  foot,  while  com- 
pressed cotton  in  American  bales  is  rarely  35  pounds,  and  frequently 
only  25  pounds.  The  bagging  and  ties  in  which  the  cotton  is  put  up  is 
a  source  of  loss  to  the  farmer,  though  he  seldom  realizes  it,  and  when 
he  does  is  at  a  loss  how  to  avoid  it.  It  costs  about  60  cents  a  bale  and 
adds  21  pounds  to  24  pounds  to  its  weight.  No  distinction  is  made  in  the 
home  market  for  any  difference  in  the  weight  of  tbe  covering.  A  bale 
having  30  pounds  of  jute  and  iron  on  it  sells  at  the  same  price  per 
pound  as  one  that  has  only  18  pounds  of  such  tare.  This  causes  the 
farmer  to  believe  that  the  heavier  covering  is  more  profitable.  But  in 
Liverpool,  where  the  price  of  cotton  for  the  world  is  in  large  measure 
established,  a  deduction  of  6  per  cent  is  made  for  tare.  That  is  to  say, 
24  pounds  are  deducted  from  a  400-pound  bale  and  30  pounds  from  a 
500-pound  bale.  Not,  indeed,  from  every  individual  bale,  but  a  discount 
in  the  prices  of  cotton  to  that  extentismade  the  rule  with  their  purchas- 
ing agents  in  this  country.  The  tare  deducted  in  this  way  amounts  for 
the  present  to  a  weight  equal  to  that  of  500,000  bales  of  cotton,  worth,  even 
at  the  low  prices  of  this  crop,  $14,250,000.  The  percentage  of  the  weight 
of  covering  to  that  of  contents  being  greater  for  a  small  than  it  is  for  a 
large  package,  the  loss  falls  less  heavily  on  the  first  than  it  does  on  the 
latter,  and  this  would  tend  to  make  the  charges  less  on  a  light  than 
they  are  on  a  heavy  bale.  However,  there  are  such  a  number  of  other 
charges  that  attach  to  the  bale  that  this  is  not  sufficient  motive  for 
reducing  its  size.  Taken  altogether,  it  is  generally  admitted  that  the 
American  bale  is  the  clumsiest,  dirtiest,  most  expensive,  and  most 
wasteful  package  in  which  cotton,  or  in  fact  any  commodity  of  like 
value,  is  anywhere  put  up.  It  has  no  friends  either  among  manufac- 
turers, buyers,  shippers,  insurers,  or  producers.  Custom  seems  alone 
responsible  for  this  incubus  on  the  industry.  Among  other  efforts  made 
to  remedy  its  defects,  the  Bessonette  system  of  baling  requires  men- 
tion. The  Bessonette  press  is  a  self- feeding  press  which  receives  the 
bat  of  lint  as  it  comes  from  the  condenser  upon  a  spool  between  two 
heavy  rollers.  The  friction  of  the  rollers  rotates  the  spool  and  winds 
the  bat  upon  it  so  tightly  as  to  press  out  nearly  all  the  air  and  to  form 
the  roll  into  a  package  with  a  density  of  35  pounds  to  the  cubic  foot 
and  of  uniform  size  and  shape  throughout.  The  pressure  employed  is 
only  25,000  pounds  to  the  bale,  against  5,000,000  pounds  by  the  com- 
press. In  the  Bessonette,  as  in  the  Dedrick  press,  the  pressure  is 
exerted  equally  upon  each  separate  portion  of  the  cotton  as  it  is  sub- 
jected to  the  power.  In  the  compress,  one  sudden  blow  of  tremendous 
force  acts  upon  the  entire  bale  and  drives  the  mass  that  stood  from  27 
inches  to  40  inches  deep  into  a  space  of  7  inches.  It  is  true  that  when 
the  pressure  in  the  compress  is  taken  off  the  elasticity  of  the  fiber  causes 
the  bale  to  swell  up  again  to  a  thickness  of  12  inches  to  18  inches,  but 
the  injury,  whatever  it  is,  has  been  already  done,  and  the  enlargement 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON. 


363 


only  gives  a  misshapen,  turtle-back  package,  which  has  to  be  reduced 
again  by  jackscrews  in  the  ship's  hold.  The  variations  in  the  length 
and  width  of  the  bale  remain  unchanged  by  the  action  of  the  compress, 
and  this  again  adds  to  the  difficulty  of  compact  loading.  The  Besso- 
nette  cylindrical  bale  (fig.  31),  on  the  contrary,  is  of  uniform  length, 
with  a  diameter  of  14  inches  to  16  inches.  The  bales  are  covered  with 
cotton  cloth.  The  ends  are  capped  with  the  same  material,  held  in 
place  by  a  small  hoop  of  wire.  No  ties  are  used,  nor  are  they  neces- 
sary, for  the  bale  retains  its  shape  without  them.    The  tare  is  only  5i 


Fig.  31. — The  Bessonette  cylindrical  cotton  bale. 

pounds  against  the  30  pounds  now  charged  on  the  average  bale,  and 
the  material  of  whicb  it  consists  will  have  a  value  when  the  bale  is 
unwound  much  greater  than  the  iron  ties  and  jute  now  used,  which  can 
only  serve  as  waste.  The  bales  may  be  sampled  in  the  usual  way,  but 
much  more  easily  by  removing  the  caps  from  the  ends,  when  the  quality 
of  each  separate  layer,  just  as  it  comes  from  the  condenser,  may  be 
inspected,  thus  rendering  mixed  or  fraudulent  packing  impossible.  A 
striking  feature  in  these  bales  is  that  they  are  practically  fireproof. 
Experiments  were  made  in  Waco,  Tex.,  on  November  16,  1894,  in  the 


364  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

presence  of  a  number  of  insurance  men.  A  hole  was  cut  in  the  covering 
and  some  of  the  loose  lint  puffed  out.  A  match  was  applied,  and  the 
lint  blazed  up  and  then  went  out,  as  it  would  have  done  if  laid  upon  a 
log.  The  covering  was  ripped  half  the  length  of  the  bale  and  a  torch 
applied  with  the  same  result;  the  loose  cotton  burned  without  igniting 
the  bale.  The  end  of  the  bale  was  opened  and  lired;  it  burned  an  inch 
or  two  deep,  and  the  fire  went  out.  All  the  covering  was  then  taken  off 
and  loose  cotton  piled  upon  the  bale  and  set  on  fire.  It  blazed  up,  and 
when  the  blaze  was  at  its  height  the  bale  was  rolled  out  of  the  flames 
and  turned  over  a  time  or  two  to  smother  the  blaze.  One  layer  of  cotton 
was  rolled  off  from  the  outside  of  the  bale  and  the  balance  was  found 
absolutely  free  from  fire.  The  air  is  so  completely  pressed  out  from  the 
lint  that  it  does  not  support  combustion.  The  experiment  entitles  the 
bale  to  the  appellation  bestowed  upon  it  by  Edward  Atkinson  of  the 
"underwriters'  bale."  There  is  a  saving  in  ginning  and  baling  by  this 
method,  and  a  conservative  estimate  places  the  saving  on  compressing, 
handling,  insurance,  and  transportation  at  $4.25  a  bale,  which,  on  last 
year's  prices,  is  fully  20  per  cent  of  the  value  of  a  bale.  Such  processes 
will  encounter  much  opposition  from  the  dead  weight  of  existing  meth- 
ods and  from  the  large  capital  invested  in  their  operation,  but  in  the 
long  run  the  saving  and  security  effected  by  them  ought  to  secure  their 
adoption.  The  Southern  cotton  mills  will  not  care  so  much  for  this; 
they  do  not  want  and  do  not  use  compressed  cotton,  preferring  to  get 
it  directly  from  the  producer.  While  they  benefit  by  the  reduction  of 
the  price  which  discounts  the  tare  charged  abroad,  they  are  able  to  dis- 
pose of  many  of  the  iron  ties  and  nearly  all  the  bagging  to  the  cotton 
growers,  to  be  used  by  them  for  the  same  purpose  again. 

Large  ginhouses,  with  improved  methods  of  handling  cotton,  are 
being  put  up  in  many  places  in  connection  with  oil  mills.  They  facili- 
tate the  purchase  and  cheapen  the  cost  of  seed.  The  seed  are  of  better 
quality,  not  having  been  subjected  to  damage  from  heating  during 
transportation.  Selected  directly  from  the  gin,  they  produce  a  superior 
oil  and  meal.  It  is  thought  that  a  whole  round  of  operations  now  dis- 
tributed among  such  a  multitude  of  middlemen  will  in  time  be  concen- 
trated about  the  giuhouse,  and  that  it  will  become  the  pivot  of  the 
whole  cotton  industry,  from  the  time  the  raw  cotton  leaves  the  field 
until  it  is  ready  for  the  mills  and  the  various  by-products  are  suitably 
prepared  for  the  consumer.  As  is  now  the  case  in  many  cotton- 
producing  countries,  the  ginner  will  purchase  the  seed  cotton  from  the 
grower,  store,  gin,  bale,  ship,  and  sell  it.  The  farmer  will  carry  back 
with  him,  besides  the  cash  his  lint  sells  for,  the  hulls  and  meal  for  his 
stock  feed  and  fertilizer,  and  such  portion  of  pure  oil  as  he  may  need 
as  a  substitute  for  the  hog's  lard  he  has  been  accustomed  to  use. 
Thus  he  would  accomplish  at  once  what  he  does  now  only  by  several 
journeys  and  by  complicated  dealings  with  the  venders  of  bagging  and 
ties,  fertilizers,  groceries,  and  stock  feed,  and  with  cotton  brokers. 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON.  365 

Although  the  ginning  aud  packing  of  cotton  would  seem  naturally 
to  be  entitled  to  a  position  among  manufacturing  industries,  at  least  to 
the  same  extent  that  slaughtering  and  packing  cattle  are,  or  grinding 
grain,  or  sawing  plank,  it  has  never  been  so  classified.  No  mention  of 
ginhouses  whatever  as  industrial  establishments  was  attempted  prior 
to  the  Eleventh  Census.  In  that  enumeration  their  aggregate  number 
is  given  as  1,037 — a  figure,  however,  far  below  the  actual  facts.1  In  the 
absence  of  reliable  data,  it  can  only  be  said  that  it  would  have  required 
over  23,000  gins,  working  full  time  during  the  ginning  season  (which  is, 
of  course,  never  done),  to  clean  the  last  crop,  and  that  the  cost  of  the 
plant  and  power  to  operate  them  must  have  exceeded  $30,000,000. 
The  old  cost  of  ginning  aud  packing,  covering  not  furnished,  was  $5  a 
bale.  The  cost  is  now  greatly  reduced.  In  Texas  it  is  a  twelfth,  or  $3 
a  bale.  In  some  sections  of  the  east  it  is  as  low  as  one-thirtieth,  esti- 
mated to  be  about  $1  per  bale,  though  it  amounted  to  a  good  deal  less 
than  that  at  the  last  season's  prices. 

MANUFACTURE   AND   USES   OF   COTTON  BY-PRODUCTS. 

Among  the  by  products  of  ginning  the  motes  may  be  mentioned.  In 
the  small  ginhouses  little  care  was  taken  of  them.  They  were  given  to 
anyone  who  would  take  them  away,  and  were  used  for  stuffing  bedding 
and  bed  clothes,  making  very  comfortable  coverings  for  cold  weather. 
In  the  larger  establishments  they  are  passed  through  a  machine  to  free 
them  from  dust,  mixed  with  seed,  reginned,  and  sold  as  an  inferior 
staple,  but  yielding  a  notable  revenue. 

Of  very  much  greater  importance  is  the  seed,  which,  after  reserving 
some  7  per  cent  for  planting  purposes,  are  disposed  of  as  fertilizers  or 
sold  to  the  oil  mills. 

OIL. 

Oil  obtained  from  various  vegetable  substances  has  been  esteemed 
from  the  earliest  times  as  one  of  the  most  precious  gifts  of  nature,  and 
its  abundance  marked  the  periods  of  greatest  prosperity.  Notwith- 
standing the  use  of  cotton  as  a  textile  material  in  the  remotest  days, 
there  is  no  record  of  oil  being  extracted  from  the  seed.  The  Chinese 
and  the  cotton  growers  of  central  Asia  have  for  a  long  time  ground 
the  whole  seed  in  rude  mills  and  fed  the  cake  to  their  oxen.  Such  oil 
as  was  extracted  in  this  rough  manner  was  used  for  purposes  of  illu- 
mination, and  very  little  of  it  was  consumed  as  food.  Among  western 
natious,  the  first  mention,  perhaps,  of  cotton-seed  oil  is  to  be  found  in 
the  proceedings  of  a  society  instituted  in  London  for  the  encourage- 
ment of  the  arts,  manufactures,  and  commerce  for  the  year  1783.  Seed 
from  the  cotton  growers  of  the  West  Indies  was  crushed  in  a  mill  in 
London  in  the  presence  of  the  secretary  of  the  society  and  the  oil 
extracted.  The  result  was  so  satisfactory  that  the  society  offered  a 
prize  of  a  gold  medal  to  any  planter  in  the  British  West  Indies  who 

JThe  figures  of  the  Eleventh  Census,  however,  refer  to  public  ginneries,  no  account 
being  taken  of  private  establishments. 


366  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

should  express  a  ton  of  oil  from  the  seed  and  make  5  hundredweight 
of  dry,  hard  cake  fit  for  cattle  food  from  the  residue  after  extracting 
the  oil.  The  offer  was  made  from  year  to  year  until  1789,  when,  no 
results  having  been  obtained,  it  was  discontinued.  Mills,  in  his  sta- 
tistics of  South  Carolina,  published  in  1826,  says  that  Benjamin  War- 
ing had  established  an  oil  mill  in  Columbia,  and  "expressed  from 
cotton  seed  a  very  good  oil."  It  was  estimated,  he  says,  that  100 
pounds  of  seed  would  yield  a  gallon  of  oil,  which  he  thought  a  very  low 
estimate.  He  doubtless  had  in  his  mind  the  yield  of  oil  from  linseed, 
which  was  then  known  to  be  about  1  pound  of  oil  from  4  pounds  of  seed. 
Analyses  show  that  cotton  seed  contain  about  20  per  cent,  or  53  gallons, 
of  oil  per  ton  of  seed.  Such  a  result  has  not  yet  been  attained  in  the 
American  manufacture  of  the  article.  The  highest  actual  yield  at  the 
oil  mills  is  44  gallons,  with  40  gallons  as  a  high  average.  English  mills, 
however,  repress  the  cake  from  which  this  amount  has  been  extracted 
in  America,  and  obtain  a  product  that  is  found  remunerative.  About 
1832  a  small  cotton-oil  mill  was  operated  on  one  of  the  islands  on  the 
Georgia  coast.  Attempts  were  made  in  Natchez,  Miss.,  two  years 
later,  to  extract  oil  from  the  seed.  In  Ure's  Dictionary,  1843,  cotton 
seed  is  mentioned  in  a  list  of  41  plants  from  which  oil  is  obtained, 
but  no  further  reference  is  made  to  it.  A  Mr.  Good  engaged  in  the 
manufacture  of  the  oil  in  New  Orleans  in  1847,  and  he  used  to  exhibit 
a  small  bottle  of  the  oil  which  he  said  had  cost  him  $12,000.  The 
French  made  a  better  advance  in  developing  the  industry.  From  the 
naked  seed  of  the  Egyptiau  cotton  they  extracted  oil,  refined  it,  and 
used  it  for  edible  purposes.  Paul  Aldige,  of  New  Orleans,  visited  Mar- 
seilles to  study  the  processes  employed.  As  a  result  of  his  efforts,  the 
cotton-seed-oil  industry  was  revived  in  New  Orleans  about  1855.  The 
war  checked  its  growth.  The  blockade  of  the  ports  preventing  the 
export  of  the  cake,  it  was  used  for  fuel.  The  hulls,  at  considerable 
expense  to  the  mills,  were  dumped  on  vacant  lots  in  the  outskirts  of 
the  city.  The  owners  of  cattle  which  grazed  over  these  lots  paid 
watchmen  to  prevent  them  from  feeding  on  the  hulls,  fearing  they  would 
be  made  sick.  The  blockade,  however,  rendering  forage  with  all  other 
supplies  very  scarce,  the  cattle  were  allowed,  cautiously,  to  gratify 
their  predilections  for  the  hulls,  and  no  injury  resulting,  hulls  became 
a  staple  stock  feed. 

OIL  MILLS. 

The  growth  of  the  oil  industry  was  slow.  As  late  as  1858  a  list  of  50 
plants  yielding  oil,  given  in  the  Encyclopaedia  Britannica,  does  not 
include  cotton.  In  1860  there  were  7  establishments  for  the  manufac- 
ture of  cotton-seed  oil  in  the  United  States.  There  were  4  mills  in  the 
South  in  1867,  and  they  increased  greatly  in  number,  there  being  26  in 
1870  and  45  in  1880.  The  crude  oil  sold  for  from  50  to  60  cents  a  gal- 
lon, and  there  seemed  a  promise  of  very  large  profits  in  the  business. 
Improvements  were  made  in  the  machinery  and  processes  and  guarded 
with  great  secrecy  by  the  parties  devising  them.  The  oil  industry  was 
at  first  controlled  by  one  large  company,  but  others  soon  sprung  up,  the 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON. 


367 


competition  between  which  has  been  of  advantage  to  the  producer  of 
seed.  The  annual  report  of  the  American  Cotton  Oil  Company  for  1891 
illustrates  the  scale  on  which  the  cotton-seed-oil  industry  is  being  con- 
ducted. With  a  capital  of  $33,761,700,  it  owns  72  crude-oil  mills,  15 
refineries,  1  lard  and  cottolene  plants,  9  soap  factories,  15  cotton  gin- 
neries, 3  cotton  compresses,  2  fertilizer  mixing  plauts,  1  ocean  tank 
steamship  of  4,200  tons  and  2,300  horsepower,  355  oil-tank  cars,  23 
box  cars,  and  1  barrel  car,  besides  products,  real  estate,  etc.  The  sale 
of  their  products  for  the  year  amounted  to  $23,879,400.  The  influence 
of  these  large  companies,  while  sometimes  complained  of  as  arbitrary 
and  oppressive  on  the  whole,  promoted  and  developed  the  industry. 

Their  numerous  agents  engaged  in  the  purchase  of  seed  educated 
the  farmers  to  a  knowledge  of  its  value.  They  introduced  on  a  large 
scale  the  products  to  consumers.  They  improved  the  methods  and 
machinery.  In  a  word,  they  cleared  the  ground,  and  now  all  who  desire 
to  do  so  may  sow  and  reap.  The  following  table  exhibits  the  growth 
of  the  cotton-seed  oil  industry  in  the  United  States: 

Statistics  of  the  cottoti-oil  industry. 


Tear. 

Estab- 
lish- 
ments. 

Capital. 

Eme^°y"       ™*°* 

Cost  of 
materials. 

Value  of 
products. 

1860 

7 

26 

45 

119 

252 

$351, 000 
1,  225,  350 
3, 862,  500 

183 

644 

3,114 

6,301 

$75,  956 

292,  032 

880,  830 

1, 907, 827 

$498, 000 

1,  333,  031 

5, 091,  251 

14, 363, 120 

18,  000, 000 

$741  000 

1870 

2  205,  610 

1880 

1890 

7,  690,  921 
19,335  947 

1894 

30,  000,  000 

1 

The  great  increase  noted  in  1894  is  due  in  a  large  measure  to  the 
establishment  of  small  mills.  Their  increase  by  the  side  of  the  large 
companies  shows  how  large  a  part  of  the  field  well  adapted  to  this 
industry  remains  unoccupied. 

A  ton  of  cotton  seed  occupies  a  space  of  over  88  cubic  feet.  As  the 
smallest  mills  crush  10  tons  of  seed  a  day  and  the  larger  ones  over 
200,  considerable  storage  room  is  required  for  this  material.  The  seed 
from  the  whole  crop  is  ready  for  the  mill  by  the  end  of  December,  and 
is  always  exposed  to  damage  by  remaining  at  the  gin,  where  sufficient 
shelter  for  it  is  not  provided.  It  is  a  very  unstable  product,  for  even 
the  pressure  of  the  mass,  if  stored  in  bulk,  especially  if  any  portion  of 
them  have  been  trampled  upon  and  crushed,  suffices  to  cause  heating 
and  a  rapid  fermentation  in  the  damp  seed  as  they  come  from  the  gin, 
which  either  destroys  the  kernel  entirely  or  renders  it  fit  to  produce 
only  meal  and  oil  of  inferior  quality.  No  plan  has  yet  been  devised  to 
preserve  them  in  large  quantities,  and  rapid  handling  is  a  necessity. 
If  transportation  is  taxed  to  move  the  cotton  crop,  little  subject  to 
damage  and  loss  except  by  fire,  it  can  readily  be  understood  how 
much  greater  the  burden  must  be  of  moving,  during  this  same  sea- 
son of  heavy  work,  this  perishable  commodity  that  is  twice  the  weight 
of  the  lint  and  occupies  a  space  40  per  cent  greater.    In  the  report  of 


368  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

the  American  Cotton  Oil  Company  for  1893  it  is  estimated  that  the 
cost  of  the  transportation  of  that  portion  of  the  seed  crushed  by  the 
mills,  and  its  products,  by  railroads  and  steamboats  amounted  to  more 
than  $8,000,000.  The  mills  have  seed  houses  and  scales  at  the  railroad 
stations  and  employ  agents  to  purchase  the  seed  as  the  wagons  bring 
them  from  the  gin.  They  are  stored,  and  as  occasion  offers  shipped  in 
bulk  in  box  cars.  The  seed  transported  by  water  are  sacked.  The 
smaller  mills  obtain  most  if  not  all  their  seed  directly  from  the  gin  by 
wagon. 

Arrived  at  the  mill,  the  seed  are  shovelled  into  a  bucket  elevator  that 
empties  them  into  a  screw  conveyor  in  the  very  top  of  the  building  and 
running  its  whole  length.  Chutes  on  either  side  of  this  conveyor  dis- 
charge the  seed  into  the  building,  wherever  storage  room  is  most 
available. 

Below  the  level  of  the  floor,  and  immediately  under  this  conveyor, 
there  is  another  conveyor  by  which  the  seed,  as  it  is  needed,  is  carried 
into  the  mill.  One  man  will  thus  dispose  of  30  tons  in  12  hours. 
The  seed  is  taken  from  this  conveyor  into  an  elevator,  which  delivers 
them  to  the  boll  screen.  This  is  a  cylinder  revolving  20  times  in  a 
minute,  with  perforations  sufficiently  large  to  allow  the  seed  to  escape 
into  a  box  below,  while  the  larger  impurities,  such  as  bolls,  flocks  of 
lint,  and  other  foreign  substances  mixed  with  the  seed  are  poured  out 
at  the  farther  end  of  the  screen.  Another  elevator  receives  the  seed 
from  the  box  below  the  boll  screen  and  transports  them  to  the  sand 
screen.  This  is  a  screen  or  reel  similar  in  construction  to  the  first, 
except  that  the  perforations  are  smaller;  the  seed  are  retained  and  the 
sand  and  dust  sifted  out  from  them.  The  clean  seed  pass  on  to  a 
blower,  where  the  fine  dust  is  expelled  by  a  current  of  air  and  the  seed 
themselves  are  blown  in  a  thin  layer  over  magnetic  plates,  or  bars, 
which  attract  and  retain  bits  of  metal,  fragments  of  nails  and  bolts 
mixed  through  carelessness  with  the  seed,  and  so  far  escaping  the  clean- 
ing process.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  man  in  the  screen  room  to  remove 
these  pieces  of  iron  at  frequent  intervals,  and  their  quantity  is  a  great 
surprise  to  the  ginners  who  have  handled  the  seed  cotton.  In  these 
various  processes  the  original  weight  of  the  seed  is  reduced  about  6 
per  cent,  and  if  they  are  green  or  damp  the  loss  will  exceed  this. 

Being  now  thoroughly  cleaned,  a  conveyor  and  elevator  carry  the 
seed  to  the  feeders  of  the  linters.  These  are  large  gins  having  usually 
106  saws  placed  much  closer  together  than  they  are  in  the  ordinary  gin. 
A  linter  of  this  size  requires  a  5-horse  power  to  move  it  and  makes 
350  revolutions  per  minute.  It  can  regin  16  to  24  tons  of  seed  in  24 
hours.  The  short  fiber  or  linters,  as  it  is  called,  passes  to  a  condenser, 
which  forms  it  into  a  roll.  The  rolls  are  removed  every  hour  and  placed 
in  a  press  to  be  baled  as  other  cotton  is.  It  is  used  to  make  paper, 
hats,  carpet  yarns,  cheap  cloth,  and  for  most  of  the  purposes  to  which 
ordinary  lint  cotton  is  applied,  but  of  course  commands  a  lower  price. 
The  debuting  of  the  seed  is  necessary  to  remove  the  down,  which 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON. 


369 


hh(-iMMhhh      _<1<1     H     mm         MM     H     mm     <1     <!mm 


g-ffl 


£.3    B 


re  &V  _. 

£."■**  S  p 


a  re    c-s  p  • 
If*     I 


n 

H«S§! 

c  — 

5  £ 

6 

r. 

yor  and 
ts  and  li 
or  and  a 
ator  anc 
of    de 

p 
p 

< 

I'pI"! 

a 

<^?s 

•    o  ■-> 

0 

O              13   C 

3  re  cr< 

P.P-C    I 

2  o  re  < 
">  o  H  < 

e+  d    ?    t 


im     c»     bjKcpco 

S  ■  _  p-a>  m  o  er 

3     2        P-5B 

2     ar° 


re,      g 


p  ~i 


1993— No.  33- 


-24 


370  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

otherwise  absorbs  the  oil  and  prevents  it  from  being  extracted.  It 
also  renders  the  seed  easier  to  plant  and  improves  the  hulls  for  stock 
feeding. 

The  seed  fall  from  the  linter  into  a  conveyor,  which  carries  them  to  the 
huller.  The  huller  is  a  strong  cylinder  furnished  with  knives  inside  of 
which  a  drum  having  another  set  of  knives  adjusted  to  within  one  to 
three  sixteenths  of  an  inch  to  the  others  revolves  850  times  a  minute. 
The  seed  falling  between  these  knives  is  rapidly  cut  to  pieces,  the  loose 
kernel  or  meat  dropping  out.  A  huller  of  medium  size  will  work  up 
40  to  50  tons  of  seed  a  day. 

The  oil  mill  day  is  twenty-four  hours,  for  the  work  goes  on  night  and 
day  during  the  season,  one  gang  of  laborers  being  employed  during 
the  day  and  another  at  night.  This  is  done  first,  in  order  to  handle  the 
seed  as  rapidly  as  possible  to  save  storage  room  and  to  avoid  injury  to 
the  seed  by  prolonged  storage,  and  in  the  second  place  to  avoid  a  certain 
amount  of  loss  resulting  from  an  interruption  of  the  cooking  of  the 
meats.  The  mills  thus  run  continuously  from  Monday  morning  to  Sat- 
urday night  when  there  is  a  supply  of  seed. 

The  mass  of  chopped  seed,  meats,  and  hulls  pass  by  elevator  and 
conveyor  to  a  large  reel  covered  with  screen  wire,  revolving  20  times 
a  minute.  The  meshes  of  the  wire  are  of  such  size  as  to  allow  the 
meats  to  fall  through,  while  most  of  the  hulls  are  retained,  pass  out  of 
the  tail  of  the  reel,  and  are  carried  by  a  conveyor  to  the  hull  house. 
The  hulls  are  so  bulky  as  to  make  storage  difficult.  They  are  liable  to 
heat  when  kept  in  bulk,  but  this  is  obviated  by  putting  them  up  into 
small  packages  of  85  to  90  pounds,  confined  by  boards  and  wires,  hav- 
ing a  density  of  33  pounds  to  the  cubic  foot.  Baling  as  at  present 
practiced  costs  about  90  cents  a  ton,  but  the  hulls  keep  well  and  are 
easily  handled.  They  are  sometimes  pressed  into  sacks  and  preserved 
in  that  way,  or  before  baling  and  sacking  they  may  be  mixed  with 
definite  quantities  of  cotton-seed  meal,  bran,  cracked  corn,  or  other 
feeding  stuff,  to  be  disposed  of  as  a  prepared  stock  food.  Heretofore  a 
large  proportion  of  the  hulls  have  been  used  for  feeding  the  engines 
that  supplied  motive  power  to  the  mills.  Their  fuel  value  is  estimated 
at  80  to  90  cents  a  ton  where  good  pine  wood  is  to  be  had  at  $2  a  cord 
or  coal  at  $3.50.  A  cord  of  wood  is  considered  equal  in  heating  power 
to  2£  tons  of  hulls,  and  a  ton  of  coal  to  4£  tons  of  hulls.  This  is  rather 
expensive  use  to  make  of  an  article  retailing  at  this  date  in  some  of  the 
towns  at  $8  a  ton  for  stock  food.  Few  articles  have  come  to  the  front 
more  rapidly  than  cotton-seed  hulls.  An  English  report  on  the  oil 
industry  in  America  in  1887  says  there  were  made  175,000  tons  of  cake, 
75,000  tons  of  oil,  and  243,750  tons  of  waste.  This  waste  was  the  hulls, 
which  at  a  date  a  little  anterior  to  the  date  of  that  report  the  mills 
were  hiring  wagons  to  haul  off  and  put  out  of  the  way,  but  for  which 
they  can  not  now  supply  the  demand. 

As  the  meats  fall  into  the  box  below  the  reel  they  pass  on  to  a  wire 
separator  or  shaker  oscillating  250  times  a  minute.     The  short  down 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON.  371 

adhering  to  the  hulls  that  remain  with  the  meats  causes  them  to  felt  or 
stick  together  in  wads  as  they  are  tossed  upon  the  shaker,  and  thus  pre- 
vents them  from  falling  through  with  the  meats  as  they  are  sifted  out. 
The  naked  seed  of  Egyptian  and  Sea  Island  cotton  not  being  provided 
with  this  down,  the  meats  and  hulls  can  not  be  separated  as  thoroughly 
as  is  done  with  the  American  upland  seed;  as  a  consequence  the  oil 
and  cake  made  from  them  is  of  inferior  quality.  The  cleaned  meats 
are  carried  by  a  conveyor  to  a  set  of  heavy  chilled-iron  rollers,  varying 
from  3  to  5  in  number  and  from  2  to  5  feet  in  length,  according  to  the 
capacity  of  the  mill.  The  meats  are  evenly  distributed,  in  proper 
quantity,  from  a  hopper  to  the  rolls,  and  pass  in  succession  between 
each  pair  of  rolls,  whose  smooth,  hard  surfaces  and  heavy  weight 
mash  them  into  thin  flakes,  crushing  every  oil  cell. 

After  this  crushing  the  meats  drop  into  a  conveyor,  which  delivers 
them  to  the  heaters.  These  are  large  cast-iron  steam-jacketed  kettles 
provided  with  stirrers,  which  keep  the  meats  moving  while  they  are 
being  cooked.  The  duration  of  the  cooking  varies  from  20  to  30  min- 
utes, according  to  the  condition  of  the  kernels  and  the  good  judg- 
ment of  the  cook,  a  human  quality  here  called  for  the  first  time  to  sup- 
plement the  automatic  mechanism  that  has  conducted  the  seed  to  this 
point  through  all  the  various  processes  it  has  undergone  in  its  journey 
from  the  seed  house.  The  object  of  the  cooking  is  to  expand  the  oil  in 
the  meats  and  render  it  more  fluid,  and  to  drive  off  the  water,  which 
not  only  reduces  the  quality  of  the  oil  but  is  liable  to  work  serious 
injury  to  the  expensive  cloths  used  to  envelop  the  cakes  in  the  press. 
Very  dry  meats  may  sometimes  be  cooked  in  12  to  18  minutes,  while 
fresh  seeds  may  require  45  minutes.  Close  to  the  heaters  stands  the 
"  former,"  which  shapes  the  meats  into  cakes  for  the  press.  The  cakes  as 
they  come  from  the  former  are  wrapped  in  camel's  haircloth  and  removed 
by  hand  to  the  press,  where  they  are  arranged  in  a  series  of  boxes,  one 
above  the  other,  between  the  plates  of  the  press,  and  subjected  to  a 
pressure  of  3,000  to  4,000  pounds  to  the  square  inch  by  hydraulic  power. 

The  size  of  the  press  varies.  One  carrying  16  boxes  has  a  capacity 
of  15  to  20  tons  of  crushed  seed  in  a  day.  As  the  ram  rises  the  oil  is 
pressed  out,  slowly  at  first,  but  later  running  in  streams  down  the  press 
as  the  pressure  increases.  Skillful  hands  will  charge  a  16-box  press  in 
2  minutes,  and  the  press  being  allowed  a  short  time  to  drain,  may  be 
run  up  every  10  to  20  minutes.  The  cakes,  pressed  as  solid  as  boards, 
are  taken  from  the  press,  stripped  of  the  cloths,  loaded  upon  a  truck, 
and  weighed  to  keep  tally  of  the  seed  crushed.  The  weight  of  the  cake 
(multiplied  by  2  plus  the  weight  of  the  oil  (lh  pounds  per  gallon)  which 
is  measured,  gives  approximately  the  weight  of  the  seed  crushed.  The 
stripped  cakes  are  stacked  to  dry.  When  dry,  as  occasion  requires, 
they  are  passed  through  a  cake  cracker,  which  breaks  them  into  frag- 
ments of  a  size  suitable  to  be  fed  to  a  mill.  The  mill  grinds  these 
fragments  into  a  fine  meal,  which  is  put  up  in  sacks  containing  100 
pounds.    Sometimes  the  meal  is  bolted  to  separate  it  from  small  pieces 


, 


372  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

of  the  hull,  which,  being  tough  and  leathery,  are  not  readily  ground  up. 
The  oil  is  pumped  into  a  settling  tank,  where  impurities  fall  to  the 
bottom,  and  the  clear  oil  is  drawn  off  into  storage  tanks,  preparatory 
to  being  shipped.  The  settlings  or  "foots,"  as  they  are  called,  are  thrown 
back  into  the  heaters  and  repressed.  They  are  also  barreled  and  sold 
as  soap  stock.  Sometimes  the  oil  is  drawn  directly  from  the  settling 
into  the  refining  tank,  for  there  are  oil  mill  men  who  believe  that  oil  is 
somewhat  injured  if  allowed  to  stand  48  hours  without  being  refined. 
In  the  refining  tank  the  oil  is  gently  heated  and  kept  agitated  by  stir- 
ring and  by  having  air  thrown  into  it  from  below  through  a  perforated 
pipe.  It  is  treated  with  caustic  soda  or  potash,  which  coagulates  the 
impurities  and  causes  them  to  sink.  The  oil  is  then  drawn  off,  washed 
with  water,  which  dissolves  out  the  alkali,  the  oil  floating  on  top,  and 
passed  through  a  filter  press.  The  refining  completed,  it  is  barreled  for 
shipment. 

OIL  MILL  PRODUCTS. 

At  one  time  all  oil  was  shipped  in  barrels,  but  now  only  refined  oil. 
or  oil  on  which  cheap  rates  of  transportation  are  obtained,  is  shipped 
in  this  way.  As  early  as  1885  the  American  Oil  Trust  introduced  the 
use  of  tank  cars.  By  1890  their  use  had  become  general,  the  refineries 
furnishing  them  for  the  crude-oil  mills.  The  crude  oil,  after  being  sub- 
jected to  the  treatment  above  mentioned,  is  known  as  "  summer  yel- 
low." It  sells  for  26  to  28£  cents  a  gallon,  while  the  crude  oil  is  sold 
for  20  cents. 

A  prime  summer  yellow  oil  is  also  called  butter  oil,  and  is  largely 
used  in  the  manufacture  of  oleomargarine,  butterine,  etc.  When  a 
selected  yellow  oil  is  subjected  to  cold  pressure,  it  becomes  salad  oil, 
used  for  salads  and  in  cooking.  Summer  white  oil  is  obtained  from 
summer  yellow  by  treating  it  with  fullers'  earth,  or  some  other  bleach- 
ing powder,  and  is  used  in  the  manufacture  of  compound  lard  and  for 
like  purposes.  Winter  white  oil  is  the  same  as  summer  white,  except 
that  it  has  been  cold  pressed.  It  is  used  for  burning  in  miners'  lamps 
and  in  the  manufacture  of  various  medicinal  compounds.  Ordinary 
summer  yellow  is  largely  used  in  manufacturing,  such  as  tempering  steel, 
making  of  bolts  and  nuts,  etc.  As  an  illuminating  oil  it  ranks  next  to 
sperm,  but  its  principal  use  is  as  a  food  oil.  Experts  testified  before 
the  Tariff  Commission  in  1881  that  90  per  cent  of  the  oil  sold  as  olive 
oil  in  the  United  States  was  really  cotton  seed  oil.  The  Italian  Gov- 
ernment enacted  a  high-tariff  regulation  against  the  importation  of 
cotton-seed  oil  into  that  country  in  competition  with  oils  made  there. 
Similar  regulations  have  been  made  in  Germany  against  refined  cotton- 
seed oil,  which  in  the  form  of  butterine  was  being  substituted  for  the 
butter  of  the  German  dairies. 

The  stearin  left  on  the  cloths  in  the  filter  press  when  the  oil  is 
refined  is  used  for  making  butter  and  lard  surrogates  and  candles. 

As  a  food  cotton-seed  oil  was  first  used  as  an  adulterant  to  soften  and 
temper  lard  intended  for  use  in  cold  climates.     Later  on  the  fluidity  of 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON.  373 

the  oil  itself  was  corrected  by  mixing  it  with  beef  fat.  This  mixture 
was  put  on  the  market  under  the  name  of  compound  or  refined  lard.  It 
was  so  kindly  received  by  the  public  that  before  long  all  disguise  was 
dropped  and  it  was  sold  on  its  merits  in  competition  with  lard.  The 
growing  importance  of  this  food  stuff  as  an  article  of  commerce  is  indi- 
cated by  the  fact  that  while  the  exportation  of  lard  increased  only  37 
per  cent  between  1884  and  1893,  that  of  cotton-seed  oil  and  its  com- 
pounds increased  162  per  cent.     (See  p.  102). 

PRESENT   CONDITION  AND   OUTLOOK   OF  THE   COTTON-OIL  INDUSTRY. 

It  is  not  easy  to  form  a  well-defined  idea  of  the  progress,  proportions, 
and  prospects  of  an  industry  so  new  and  in  a  stage  of  such  rapid  devel- 
opment as  is  the  cotton-seed  oil  industry.  Great  improvements  have 
been  made  in  the  machinery  and  its  arrangement.  It  has  also  become 
cheaper  as  well  as  better.  An  outfit  that  ten  years  ago  cost  $1,000  for 
each  ton  of  seed  it  could  crush  in  a  day  can  be  bought  now  for  half 
that  sum.  The  quantity  of  oil  obtained  from  a  ton  of  seed  has  been 
increased  from  30  and  35  gallons  to  40  and  44  gallons,  which  is  a  con- 
siderable advance  toward  the  possible  maximum  yield  of  53  gallons. 
The  total  cost  of  production  ranged  formerly  from  $5.05  to  $0.49  for 
every  ton  of  seed  crushed;  nowT  it  is  done  for  $2  to  $3  a  ton,  and  occa- 
sionally for  less.  The  cost  of  insurance,  which  was  at  oue  time  6  to  9£ 
per  cent,  is  now  only  1£  to  6  per  cent,  on  account  of  the  great  security 
of  loss  from  fires  that  has  been  effected.  While  the  wages  of  labor 
have  not  been  much  reduced,  its  cost  has,  by  the  increase  in  the  num- 
ber of  experienced  workers  and  by  the  smaller  number  required  on 
account  of  the  labor-saving  devices  introduced.  The  labor  chiefly 
employed  is  negro  field  labor,  whose  daily  wage  is  from  40  to  50  cents. 
As,  however,  the  pressman,  cook,  and  linter-room  man  are  select  hands 
of  some  experience,  the  average  wages  run  from  60  to  70  cents  a  day. 
A  very  small  mill,  without  many  of  the  labor-saving  appliances  of  the 
larger  ones,  crushed  55  tons  with  756  hours'  labor,  or  something  less  than 
14  hours  to  the  ton.  Putting  the  wages  at  6  cents  an  hour  for  12  hours' 
work,  or  72  cents  per  day,  this  makes  the  labor  cost  of  crushing  a  ton  84 
cents.  In  point  of  fact,  the  cost  in  well  appointed  and  managed  mills 
runs  from  75  to  95  cents  per  ton.  Ten  years  ago  the  labor  cost  varied 
from  $1.84  to  $2.04  per  ton  of  seed  crushed.  This  does  not  include  the 
salaries  for  superintendence  and  management.  Formerly  these  were 
from  45  cents  to  $1  a  ton,  but  are  now  only  25  to  30  cents.  The  largest 
item,  however,  of  cost — the  cost  of  seed — can  not  be  said  to  have  fallen. 
While  the  price  is  variable,  it  is  fully  as  high,  and  sometimes  very 
much  higher,  than  it  was  formerly.  In  the  West,  where  they  are  cheap- 
est, they  were  sold  in  1880  for  $4  a  ton;  now  they  hardly  ever  bring 
less  than  $6,  and  often  more.  In  the  East  they  sold,  delivered  at  the 
mill,  for  $14  per  ton  (21  cents  per  bushel).  In  recent  years  they  have 
been  as  high  as  $20  per  ton  (30  cents  per  bushel),  and  the  price  for 
this  year  of  depression  has  been  $10  per  ton  ^15  cents  per  bushel). 


374 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


Eelatively  to  the  total  cost  of  production,  they  are  higher  now,  forming 
about  85  per  cent  of  that  cost,  while  formerly  they  were  barely  70  per 
cent.  This,  of  course,  is  the  usual  thing  in  all  manufacturing  indus- 
tries. To  obtain  seed  has  been  one  of  the  greatest  difficulties  the  oil 
industry  has  had  to  contend  with  from  the  very  beginning.  When 
Aldige,  of  New  Orleans,  was  doing  the  first  pioneer  work  in  this  direc- 
tion, he  could  only  collect  1,704  tons  of  seed  after  having  an  agent 
traveling  for  that  purpose  for  eighteen  months  in  the  Mississippi  Valley. 

COST   AND    PKOFIT   OF   THE    COTTON-OIL   INDUSTRY. 

The  profits  of  the  oil  industry  depend  naturally  on  the  cost  of  the 
seed,  the  expense  of  working  them,  and  the  price  of  the  products. 
The  cost  of  the  seed  varies  with  the  season.  In  seasons  when  oil-mill 
products  are  high  they  are  high,  and  vice  versa.  They  also  vary  greatly 
with  the  locality.  In  the  West,  as  already  stated,  seed  are  about  $0  a 
ton,  but  these  seed  yield  less  oil  than  the  higher-priced  eastern  seed, 
perhaps  25  per  cent  less,  due,  it  is  said,  to  the  dryness  of  the  climate, 
which  prevents  the  full  ripening  of  the  kernel  of  the  seed.  The  oil, 
however,  due  doubtlesS  to  this  same  dryness,  which  prevents  the  seed 
from  spoiling,  is  of  excellent  quality.  In  the  East  the  seed  cost  the 
mills  $8  to  $11.  The  following  table  shows  the  prices  of  cotton,  cotton- 
seed oil,  and  lard  in  the  New  York  market  for  a  series  of  years,  and 
also  the  prices  of  cotton-seed  meal  and  hulls  at  the  oil  mills  on  the 
Atlantic  Slope,  as  well  as  of  corn: 

Prices  of  cotton  seed  and  other  products,  1888-1894. 


Cotton,  per  pound cents . . 

Oil,  per  gallon do 

Lard,  per  pound do 

Cotton-seed  meal,  per  ton dollars. . 

Corn,  per  bushel cents.. 

Cotton-seed  hulls,  per  ton dollars.. 


10.3 
39.5 
8.72 
10 
57.30 


1889.        1890 


10.65 
38.25 
6.88 
18.2 
43 


11.07 
29.25 

6.83 
19. 43 
48.5 

2.46 


8.6 
28.75 

6.59 
18.56 
70.4 

2.65 


1892.        1893.       1894. 


7.71 
29 

7.69 
19.16 
54 

2.15 


8.24 
39.  35 
10.34 
18.28 
49.9 

1.59 


7.67 
27.75 

7.75 
16.21 
50.9 

2.25 


It  will  be  noticed  that  the  fluctuations  in  lard  have  been  greater  than 
in  oil,  and  greater  for  corn  than  for  cottonseed  meal.  The  prices  of 
hulls  in  the  West  where  cattle  are  fattened  for  market  are  greater  than 
those  here  stated,  and  at  many  of  the  mills  in  Texas  the  entire  output 
of  hulls  is  engaged  beforehand  by  the  cattlemen  at  $4  a  ton  at  the 
mills,  and  late  in  the  season  they  sold  at  the  eastern  mills  at  $5.50  per 
ton.  The  cost  of  working  a  ton  of  seed  is  approximately  as  follows: 
For  seed,  $10.50;  labor,  90  cents;  salaries,  26  cents;  repairs  and  sup- 
plies, $1.20;  taxes,  13  cents;  total,  $12.99. 

The  value  of  products  would  be,  40  gallons  of  oil,  at  20  cents  per  gal- 
lon, f.  o.  b.,  $8;  700  pounds  meal,  at  $16.20  per  ton,  $5.67;  25  pounds 
linters,  at  2  cents  per  pound,  50  cents;  800  pounds  hulls,  at  $2  per  ton,1 
90  cents;  total,  $15.07. 

'Since  the  use  of  hulls  as  cattle  food  has  become  so  extensive  they  sell  at  from 
$2.50  to  $4.     (See  p.  3860 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON. 


375 


This  would  leave  a  net  profit  of  $2.08  per  ton.  For  a  20-ton  mill 
crushing  in  100  days'  run  2,000  tons  of  seed,  this  would  amount  to 
$4,160,  or  a  dividend  of  10  per  cent,  on  over  $40,000.  The  cost  of  such 
a  mill  would  be:  Machinery  complete  of  the  latest  and  best  pattern, 
delivered  at  railroad  station,  $10,000;  buildings  and  placing  machin- 
ery, $4,000;  power,  $2,000;  in  all,  $10,000.  This  statement  may  seem 
too  favorable,  but  it  is  not  overestimated.  It  is  true  that  a  number 
of  mills  have  gone  into  bankruptcy — they  were  badly  constructed  or 
badly  managed.  Against  this  it  would  not  be  difficult  to  name  mills 
that  have  declared  dividends  of  30  and  even  of  60  per  cent,  earned  in 
one  year's  operations.  It  may  be  safely  said  that  they  are,  as  a  rule,  as 
prosperous  as  their  rapid  increase  in  numbers  would  indicate. 

Although  a  large  oil  mill  in  Rhode  Island  was  among  the  earliest  to 
be  established,  the  industry  is  now  confined  exclusively  to  the  cotton 
States.  Foreign  seed  are  imported  for  manufacture  in  some  European 
countries — France,  Italy,  and  notably  England,  where  300,000  tons  of 
seed  brought  from  Egypt  were  crushed  in  1887.  In  this  country  the 
cost  of  transportation  has  brought  the  mills  to  the  seed.  In  the 
absence  of  reliable  data,  the  following  table,  compiled  from  the  best 
informed  sources,  is  given  to  show  the  number  of  oil  mills  in  each  State, 
their  average  daily  capacity,  the  total  number  of  tons  crushed  during 
the  season  of  1894-95,  the  number  of  tons  of  seed  produced  in  each 
State,  and  the  percentage  of  that  product  worked  by  the  mills. 

Statistics  of  the  cotton-seed  oil  industry,  1894-95. 


State. 


Florida 

Tennessee 

Texas 

Arkansas 

Louisiana 

Mississippi 

Georgia 

South  Carolina. 
North  Carolina. 

Alabama 

Other  States  . . . 


Total  and  average. 


Num- 
ber of 
mills. 


Average 
daily 
amount 
of  seed 
crushed 

per  mill. 


Tons. 
15 
62 
63 
76 
77 
66 
43 
31 
35 
44 


Amount 

of  seed 

produced. 


Tons. 

24,  000 
143,  000 
,  536,  500 
354,  000 
364,  000 
583,  500 
591,  000 
409,  000 
247,  000 
427,  000 

62,  500 


Total 
amount 
of  seed 
crushed. 


Tons. 
30,000 
111,  600 
557,  000 
100.  000 
100,  000 
155,  800 
150,000 
90,  000 
50, 000 
80,  000 


Percent- 
age of 
seed 
produced 
that  were 
crushed. 


4,  741,  500   1,  424, 400 


125 
77 
35 
28 
27 
26 
25 
22 
20 
19 


The  cotton  crop  of  Florida  is  small,  largely  of  cotton  with  downless 
seed,  and  here  oil  mills  must  draw  a  portion  of  their  supply  of  material 
from  beyond  the  borders  of  the  State.  It  will  be  observed  that  the 
western  mills  have  an  average  daily  capacity  to  crush  62  to  77  tons, 
while  the  eastern  mills  work  from  21  to  44  tons  daily.  The  former 
also  crush  from  26  to  77  per  cent  of  the  amount  of  seed  they  produce, 
while  the  latter  crush  on  an  average  20  to  25  per  cent  of  the  seed  grown 
within  their  boundaries. 

The  oil  companies  with  large  capital,  who  developed  the  iudustry, 


376  THE   COTTON    PLANT. 

were  naturally  attracted  by  the  abundance  and  cheapness  of  seed  in 
the  West,  and  occupied  this  held  with  big  mills.  It  was  not  until  com- 
petition among  themselves  began  to  weaken  them  that  the  smaller 
mills,  first  in  the  Carolinas  and  Georgia  and  later  in  the  West  itself,  got  a 
solid  foothold. 

In  the  second  stage  of  the  development  of  the  industry  it  becomes 
more  and  more  apparent  that  small  mills,  purchasing  their  material 
directly  from  producers  in  their  locality,  free  from  the  cost  and  charges 
of  freight  and  agents,  and  disposing  of  the  bulk  of  their  products  to 
consumers  in  their  immediate  neighborhood,  can  be  run  most  econom- 
ically and  securely.  It  is  in  this  aspect  of  the  business  that  it  offers  a 
new  future  to  southern  agriculture  as  broad,  as  full  of  promise,  and  as 
far  reaching  as  that  created  by  the  invention  of  the  cotton  gin  itself. 

The  800  pounds  of  hulls  and  the  700  pounds  of  meal  (often  counted  at 
900  pounds  and  750  pounds)  in  every  ton  of  seed  responds  to  an  urgent 
want  where  the  seed  is  grown,  not  merely  or  even  chiefly  as  a  fertilizer 
to  sustain  the  productiveness  of  the  soil,  but  for  the  allied  and  more 
important  purposes  of  stock  feeding.  Probably  much  of  the  oil  might, 
with  much  saving  and  advantage,  be  substituted  for  the  bacon  and 
lard  brought  from  a  distance  and  consumed  in  the  vicinity  of  the  oil 
mills.  It  is  half  the  price  of  olive  oil,  used  exclusively  for  cooking  in 
preference  to  anything  else  in  many  countries,  and  at  the  present  prices 
it  is  cheaper  than  lard  or  bacon  has  ever  been  and  probably  will  ever 
be.  Of  course  it  has  to  contend  with  gastronomic  prejudices,  but  a 
closer  acquaintance  will  dispel  these.  Such  an  acquaintanceship  is  to 
be  observed  among  the  laborers  employed  in  the  mills.  They  no  longer 
bring  meat  for  their  dinners,  but  put  their  bread  under  the  press  where 
the  sweet,  warm,  fresh  oil  is  trickling  out  and  eat  it  with  a  relish,  find- 
ing it  healthful  and  nutritious. 

FERTILIZING   VALUE   OF   THE   SEED  AND   ITS   PRODUCTS. 

It  is  of  great  importance  that  the  cotton  growers  should  form  a  defi- 
nite estimate  of  the  value  of  this  commodity  to  them  in  its  raw  and  in 
its  manufactured  state.  In  the  early  days  of  cotton  planting,  when  the 
gins  began  to  furnish  seed  in  quantity,  they  were  thrown  out  carelessly 
upon  the  ground  (as  indeed  is  often  done  even  now)  and  the  hogs  ate 
them  and  died  (as  they  still  do).  To  prevent  this,  the  seed  were 
inclosed  in  pens,  but  the  small  pigs  made  their  way  in  between  the 
rads  and  fed  on  the  seed.  They  also  died.  As  a  last  resort,  to  be  rid 
of  the  nuisance  ouce  for  all,  the  seed  were  dumped  into  a  salt  water 
creek.  Then,  when  the  tide  was  low,  they  generated  a  miasmatic  odor 
so  offensive  as  to  create  a  strong  feeling  against  the  future  culture  of 
the  crop. 

Cotton  seed  figures  among  the  articles  of  export  from  the  United 
States  to  Europe.  In  1888,  stimulated  by  the  offer  of  $35  a  ton  for 
seed  in  London,  parties  in  Savannah  collected  a  quantity  and  shipped 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON.  377 

them.  It  was  found  when  the  cost,  freight,  commissions  on  selling, 
and  other  charges  were  counted  up  there  remained  a  net  surplus  of 
$1.14  a  ton,  allowing  nothing  for  the  management  of  the  enterprise. 

Before  the  oil  mills  were  established,  the  highest  valuation  placed  by 
cotton  growers  on  the  seed  was  12£  cents  per  bushel,  or  $8.29  a  ton. 
Very  little  was  ever  sold.  While  a  few  cotton  seed  were  boiled  with 
other  stuff  and  fed  to  milch  cows,  the  butter  made  was  not  much 
esteemed,  and  the  principal  use  made  of  the  seed  was  for  manure. 
Sometimes  the  seed  were  composted  with  stable  manure,  muck,  and 
woods  mold;  but  the  most  common  practice,  and  that  approved  by  the 
experience  of  the  best  farmers,  was  to  apply  the  green  seed  in  the  drill, 
or  in  the  hill,  to  cotton  and  corn.  To  do  this  it  was  necessary  to  put 
the  seed  out  in  February,  for  if  this  were  done  later  they  were  likely 
in  a  warm  spell  to  sprout.  From  12  to  20  bushels  were  put  to  the  acre. 
In  larger  quantities  it  was  thought  they  ceased  to  be  a  benefit,  and 
might  even  be  a  positive  injury.  The  oil  contained  in  the  seed  appears 
to  be  deleterious  to  plant  life.  Spots  covered  for  any  length  of  time 
by  large  piles  of  seed  remain  bare  afterwards,  as  if  they  had  been 
poisoned.  Put  on  summer  crops,  in  considerable  quantity,  it  injures 
the  stand.  Piles  of  hulls  also  render  the  soil  on  which  they  have 
rested  barren  for  a  considerable  time,  and  as  almost  any  other  cover- 
ing adds  to  the  fertility  of  the  soil  this  must  be  attributed  to  some 
special  property  of  the  hulls,  probably  to  the  oil  remaining  in  them. 

The  seed  are  perishable,  bulky,  and  costly  to  store  and  to  handle, 
and  their  use  as  fertilizer  has  been  largely  abandoned,  especially  in  the 
vicinity  of  oil  mills  where  the  more  effective  cotton-seed  meal  can  be 
obtained.1 

The  mills  now  offer  an  exchange  for  the  seed,  which  is  a  great  deal 
more  profitable  to  the  cotton  grower  than  using  the  seed.  They  give 
him  1  ton  of  meal  for  2  tons  of  seed,  paying  the  freight  both  ways.  It 
is  estimated  that  by  this  exchange  there  is  a  clear  gain,  transportation 
to  and  from  the  railroad  not  counted,  of  over  $5  for  the  farmer. 

The  gain  is,  in  fact,  much  greater.  The  oil  injurious  to  plants  has  in 
large  measure  been  removed.  A  very  perishable  article,  and  one  diffi- 
cult to  store  and  handle,  is  exchanged  for  one  much  more  durable  and 
cheaply  handled.  The  effect  of  the  meal  is  more  lasting  than  that  of  the 
seed.  Its  mechanical  condition  is  all  that  can  be  desired;  its  particles, 
having  been  subjected  to  great  pressure,  swell  to  three  times  their  size 
when  placed  in  the  damp  earth,  and  the  farmer  is  often  surprised  to 
notice  the  large  roll  of  dark  material  into  which  the  thin  yellow  thread 
of  meal  has  been  transmuted  in  the  soil.  It  is  now  recognized  as  one  of 
the  cheapest  sources  of  nitrogen,  the  most  costly  and  valuable  ingredient 
of  fertilizers.  It  did  not  obtain  this  recognition,  however,  without  over- 
coming considerable  prejudice.     The  State  inspector  of  fertilizers  for 

1  For  composition  with  reference  to  fertilizing  constituents  of  these  products,  see 
article  on  chemistry  of  cotton,  p.  93. 


378  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

Georgia,  in  1876,  refused  to  certify  to  a  fertilizer  as  standard  because 
it  contained  cotton- seed  meal.  Now  it  is  generally  used  by  all  manu- 
facturers of  fertilizers. 

FEEDING   VALUE   OP   COTTON   SEED   AND   ITS   PRODUCTS.1 

But  cotton-seed  meal  has  a  much  more  important  use  than  that  of  a 
fertilizer.  It  stands  among  the  feeding  stuffs  richest  in  protein,  the 
most  valuable  and  costly  ingredient  of  all  foods.  In  the  average  of  the 
valuations  of  feeding  stuffs  made  by  the  Connecticut,  the  New  York, 
and  the  Indiana  experiment  stations,  it  is  found  that  the  value  of  cot- 
ton-seed meal  exceeds  that  of  corn  meal  by  02  per  cent,  and  that  of  wheat 
by  G7  per  cent.  According  to  the  analysis  of  each,  the  feeding  value  of 
cotton-seed  meal  exceeds  that  of  raw  cotton  seed  by  only  26  per  cent 
Practically,  however,  raw  cotton  seed  has  never  been  fed  successfully 
to  animals  on  any  large  scale.  The  lint  on  the  seed  and  the  dust  they 
contain  are  injurious,  it  is  not  easy  to  mix  them  thoroughly  with  other 
forage,  and  so  rich  a  food  eaten  in  excess  might  easily  prove  deleterious. 
These  objections  are  in  a  large  degree  removed  by  roasting  them  or 
boiling  them  with  pumpkins,  turnips,  or  other  coarse  foods.  Such  prac- 
tice is  more  or  less  complicated  and  costly,  and  has  not  come  into  very 
general  use.  The  comparison  of  the  variable  and  complex  natural  prod- 
uct with  the  simple  and  uniform  manufactured  article  is  hardly  more 
apposite  than  comparing  an  extract  of  the  whole  ox — hide,  hoof,  and 
horns — with  a  tenderloin  steak. 

Fattening  cattle  on  cottonseed  meal  and  hulls. — The  feeding  and  fat- 
tening of  beef  cattle  on  cotton-seed  meal  and  cotton-seed  hulls  have 
been  extensively  carried  on  for  a  number  of  years.  In  the  season  of 
1893-94  it  is  said  that  13,000  car  loads  of  beeves,  fattened  exclusively 
on  this  food,  passed  through  Texarkana  alone,  going  to  the  slaughter- 
houses of  the  Northwest.  The  business  was  chiefly  carried  on  in  the 
Gulf  States  at  first,  but  it  is  gaining  ground  rapidly  on  the  Atlantic 
Slope.  Considerable  shipments  of  meal  and  hull  fattened  cattle  are 
being  made  from  the  Carolinas  to  Norfolk  and  other  points  north. 
When  the  mills  commence  to  furnish  hulls  and  meal  the  stockmen  buy 
cattle  and  bring  them  to  some  suitable  locality  where  there  is  an  abun- 
dance of  drinking  water  in  close  proximity  to  the  oil  mill.  A  yard  is 
rented  and  fenced  with  barbed  wire.  These  droves  vary  in  number 
from  500  to  5,000  in  one  inclosure,  being  herded  50  head  or  upward  to 
the  acre.  Shelters  are  no  longer  used.  Troughs  of  unplaned  boards, 
supported  a  foot  or  more  above  the  ground,  8  feet  long,  4  feet  wide,  and 
18  inches  deep,  are  scattered  about  in  these  open  yards  in  numbers  suffi- 
cient to  prevent  the  cattle  from  crowding.  The  hulls  are  unloaded  into 
the  troughs  from  wagons  bringing  them  directly  from  the  mill,  and 
cotton-seed  meal  is  mixed  with  them,  it  being  intended  to  give  a  ration 
of  3  pounds  of  it  to  the  animal  at  the  start,  gradually  increasing  the 


1  See,  also,  article  on  the  feeding  value  of  cotton-seed  products,  p.  385. 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON. 


379 


amount  until  8,  9,  and  even  10  pounds  is  fed  at  the  close  of  100  days, 
which  is  the  average  period  in  which  they  are  fully  fattened.  Barrels 
of  salt  are  left  open  in  the  inclosures  and  the  cattle  induced  to  drink 
all  the  water  they  will,  and  this  is  thought  important  on  account  of  the 
stimulating  and  heating  character  of  the  food.  As  a  rule  the  cattle 
take  to  this  food  with  much  relish.  Sometimes  they  require  a  little 
coaxing  to  induce  them  to  do  so,  and  bran  or  other  food  to  which  they 
are  accustomed  is  mixed  with  it,  or  it  is  sprinkled  with  molasses  diluted 
with  water.  None  refuse  it  finally.  Little  or  no  attention  is  paid  to 
the  manure.  It  is  allowed  to  disappear  without  being  utilized  in  these 
stock  yards;  sometimes  it  is  given  away  as  a  nuisance  to  whoever  will 
remove  it,  and  occasionally  it  is  sold  at  20  to  50  cents  a  2-horse  wagon- 
load,  chiefiy  to  truck  farmers  and  gardeners  in  the  neighborhood  of 
towns.  A  profit  of  $5  to  $0  a  head  is  considered  fair  pay  for  manag- 
ing this  business.  Sometimes  much  more  is  realized,  but  in  bad  sea- 
sons, with  inclement  winters,  high  priced  cattle,  and  a  poor  market  for 
meat,  the  gain  is  less,  and  in  some  instances  a  loss  is  incurred. 

When  it  is  considered  that  a  conservative  estimate  places  the  value 
of  the  fertilizing  elements  in  the  feed  that  may  be  recovered  in  the 
manure  at  80  per  cent,  the  great  wastefulness  of  the  present  practice  is 
obvious. 

The  results  obtained  by  feeding  hulls  and  meal  at  the  various  agri- 
cultural experiment  stations  throughout  the  country  have  been  most 
favorable.  It  is  estimated  that  the  hulls  and  meal  when  fed  to  cattle 
are  capable  of  producing  a  gain  in  live  weight  worth  $30,000,000  at  a 
cost  of  $22,000,000.  But  a  more  important  profit  from  this  disposition 
of  them  remains  to  be  mentioned.  This  is  the  mauurial  values  which 
may  be  recovered  from  them  after  they  have  subserved  the  purposes  of 
feeding.  This  can  only  be  estimated  from  the  value  of  the  fertilizing 
ingredients  they  contain.  As  has  been  said,  this  varies  according  as  it 
is  viewed  from  two  quite  different  points — that  of  their  cost  to  the 
wholesale  dealer  in  fertilizers  and  of  their  cost  to  the  farmer.  Taking 
the  lowest  statement  of  the  amount  of  these  ingredients  that  may  be 
recovered  (1,280,000  tons  of  hulls  and  1,120,000  tons  of  meal),  say  80 
per  cent,  the  calculation  stands  as  follows : 

Value  of  manure  from  animals  fed  cotton-seed  hulls  and  meal. 


Hulls : 

Nitrogen 

Phosphoric  acid 
Potash 

Meal: 

Nitrogen 

Phosphoric  acid 
Potash 


Total 


Pounds 
per  ton. 


15 

4 

22 

141.6 
56 
36 


Total. 


Pounds. 
19,  200,  000 
5,120,000 
28, 160,  00C 

158,  592, 000 
62,  720,  000 
40,  320,  000 


Cost  to  wholesale 
dealer. 


Per 

pound. 


Cents. 
12.16 
3.04 
3.04 

12.10 
3.04 
3.04 


Total. 


$2,  334, 720 
155,  648 
856,  064 

19,  284,  797 
1,  906,  688 
1, 225, 728 

25,  763,  645 


Cost  to  farmer. 


Per 
pound. 


Gents. 
24.17 
6.14 
3.04 

24.17 
6.14 
3.04 


Total. 


,  640,  640 
314,  368 
856,  064 

,331,686 
,  851,  008 
,  225,  728 


49,  219, 494 


380  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

That  is  to  say,  the  seed  of  the  cotton  crop,  once  thought  a  nuisance, 
after  yielding  an  income  to  the  farmer,  paying  the  wages  of  the  hands 
employed  in  the  oil  mills,  the  salaries  of  the  officers,  keeping  the  prop- 
erty in  good  repair,  and  paying  a  dividend  on  the  capital  invested  out 
of  the  oil  and  lint  produced,  after  fattening  a  million  and  a  third  head 
of  cattle  for  the  market  and  furnishing  the  chief  support  of  over 
3,000,000  more  for  an  entire  year,  may  yield  a  value  equal  by  one  count 
to  65  per  cent  of  all  the  commercial  fertilizers  sold  in  the  United  States 
in  1890,  and  by  another  count,  based  upon  the  actual  cash  cost  to  the 
farmer,  a  value  equal  to  over  $11,000,000  more  than  the  cost  of  the  com- 
mercial fertilizers  used  on  the  300,000,000  acres  cultivated  in  the  whole 
country.  The  potential  value  of  the  4,000,000  tons  of  seed  produced 
last  year  maybe  fairly  stated  in  this  way:  100,000,000  gallons  oil,  at  20 
cents  a  gallon,  $32,000,000;  100,000,000  pounds  of  lint,  at  2  cents, 
$2,000,000;  1,000,000  tons  of  hulls  and  1,400,000  tons  of  meal,  which 
fed  on  the  farm  to  cattle  should  produce  in  flesh  and  fat  $30,000,000 
and  in  manure  $49,000,000.  The  total  amounts  to  $113,000,000,  or  very 
nearly  half  the  value  of  the  lint  cotton  of  the  last  large  crop.  Eesults 
of  practical  experience  and  of  scientific  experiments  can  be  cited  which 
tend  to  corroborate  this  estimate. 

It  is  being  gradually  found  out  that  cotton-seed  meal  and  hulls  can 
be  fed  with  advantage  to  other  stock  besides  cattle  and  sheep.  Instances 
are  reported  in  which  it  has  been  successfully  fed  to  horses  and  mules. 

It  has  been  stated  that  cotton  seed  in  any  form  was  injurious,  and 
often  fatal,  to  hogs.  This  is  undoubtedly  true  as  regards  raw  cotton 
seed.  It  would  be  of  importance  to  determine  what  part  of  the  seed — 
the  lint,  the  hull,  or  the  meal l — was  injurious  to  hogs,  and  the  manner  in 
which  it  acted.  Mixed  with  other  feed  and  cooked,  hogs  have  been 
raised  and  fattened  on  it.  It  is  reported  to  be  beneficial  to  young 
poultry  when  mixed  with  other  foods. 

CONCLUSIONS. 

(1)  The  tendency  is  toward  the  enlargement  of  ginneries.  They  are 
more  economical  and  turn  out  a  product  of  better  quality. 

(2)  Oil  mills  of  smaller  size,  on  the  contrary,  are  on  the  increase,  and 
they  are  doing  more  of  a  local  business.  This  saves  in  the  cost  of  trans- 
porting and  storing  the  bulky  material  to  be  manufactured,  and  stimu- 
lates a  local  demand  for  the  products,  which  are  of  great  importance  to 
agriculture. 

(3)  The  products  of  the  small  local  mills  are  equal  or  superior  to  those 
of  very  large  mills.  They  can  select  the  seed  more  carefully,  and  they 
are  not  subject  to  the  same  amount  of  damage  from  heating  during 
transportation  and  storage  as  when  brought  in  great  bulk  from  distant 
points. 

'Recent  French  investi gationa  show  that  the  injurious  effect  of  cotton  seed  is  due 
to  a  poisonous  principle  peculiar  to  the  kernel.  (C.  Cornevin,  Ann.  Agron.,  22  (1896), 
No.  8,  p.  353.) 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON.  381 

(4)  The  local  mill  should  be  of  sufficient  capacity  to  crush  the  seed  as 
they  arrive,  and  experience  seems  to  show  that  a  mill  of  20  tons  capacity 
can  be  worked  as  cheaply  as  a  smaller  oue. 

(5)  The  cost  of  the  seed  being  the  heaviest  item  in  their  manufacture, 
it  is  important  to  work  them  up  as  rapidly  as  possible  to  save  money  on 
interest  and  insurance. 

(6)  To  ship  seed  to  distant  mills  and  purchase  commercial  fertilizers 
to  replace  them  inflicts  ruinous  loss  on  the  farmer,  though  it  will  profit 
to  exchange  them  for  meal  or  for  meal  and  hulls. 

(7)  That  the  products  of  the  seed  when  separated  in  the  manufacture 
of  oil  are  far  more  available  and  valuable  as  food  for  man  or  beast  or  as 
a  fertilizer  than  they  are  in  the  lump  in  raw  cotton  seed. 

(8)  Much  mystery  has  surrounded  the  operations  of  an  oil  mill  in  the 
past.  This  is  passing  away.  Men  who  never  saw  an  oil  mill  until  they 
took  charge  of  one  have  done  so  successfully  and  earned  large  divi- 
dends. The  machinery  presents  no  difficulties  greater  than  that  used 
in  a  giuhouse.  Experts  are  required  for  refining,  and  the  cook  should 
have  some  experience.  Laborers  good  about  a  giuhouse,  under  intelli- 
gent superintendence,  are  competent  to  work  an  oil  mill. 

(9)  The  business,  once  overshadowed  by  the  oil  trust  and  the  large 
companies,  is  now  open  to  all  who  wish  to  engage  in  it.  With  only  a 
little  over  a  third  of  the  seed  produced  brought  to  the  mills,  it  is  found 
that  competition  among  themselves  matters  less  than  the  education  of 
the  farmers  to  an  appreciation  of  the  advantages  to  themselves  of 
having  their  seed  milled.  Every  new  mill  diffuses  this  knowledge,  and 
opens  a  new  territory  of  supply  which  accrues  to  the  advantage  of  all 
engaged  in  the  business. 

(10)  Rapidly  as  the  oil  mills  are  increasing,  there  seems  little  danger 
of  overproduction.  Its  products  are  by  far  the  cheapest  of  all  commod- 
ities used  for  similar  purposes,  and  may  be  substituted  over  a  wide 
field  for  costlier  articles  of  prime  necessity.  The  material  on  which  it 
operates  is  limited  by  the  production  of  cotton  in  localities  where 
enough  is  grown  for  mill  purposes.  Every  new  mill  opens  a  new  mar- 
ket. Every  gallon  of  oil  and  every  ton  of  hulls  and  meal  that  could  be 
extracted  from  the  largest  crop  would  not  suffice  to  supply  the  wants 
of  the  population  of  the  cotton  States  and  of  the  soil  they  cultivate, 
much  less  to  overstock  the  markets  of  the  world. 

LINT. 

MARKETING. 

After  the  cotton  is  baled,  the  next  step  is  to  put  it  upon  the  market 
with  the  least  delay  practicable.  Formerly  the  cotton  planters,  either 
themselves  or  through  their  factors,  shipped  their  crops  directly  to  the 
principal  markets  of  this  country  or  Europe.  Now  much  the  largest 
part  of  the  crop  goes  at  once  into  the  hands  of  cotton  factors  or  mer- 
chants who  have  made  advances  of  cash  or  supplies  to  the  farmers. 


382  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

The  usual  amount  of  advances  is  intended  to  be  about  $10  a  bale  at 
the  highest  legal  rate  of  interest.  The  exigencies  of  the  case  generally 
cause  them  to  exceed  this,  and  the  persistent  decline  in  the  price  of  the 
staple  bas  made  collections  somewhat  more  difficult,  and  the  business  of 
making  advances  is  by  no  means  as  it  once  was.  The  charge  for  selling 
and  storage  varies,  but  $1  a  bale  for  selling  and  50  cents  for  storage  for 
the  first  month  and  half  that  amount  for  each  subsequent  month  may 
be  considered  a  fair  average.  Insurance  is  to  be  counted  also,  so  that 
it  appears  from  the  examination  of  some  account  sales  that  all  the 
charges  for  selling  sum  up  on  an  average  to  $1.93  per  bale,  or  to  about 
7  per  cent  on  the  net  value  of  the  crop  to  the  farmer,  or  half  a  cent 
per  pound  of  lint.  With  the  increasing  number  of  cotton  factories  in 
the  South  a  larger  amount  of  cotton  is  being  sold  directly  to  the  mills. 
If  it  could  be  grown  without  the  advances,  these  charges  might  all  be 
saved.  But  the  party  making  advances  stipulates  that  such  a  number 
of  bales  be  brought  to  them  for  storage  and  sale,  and  in  case  the  speci- 
fied number  is  not  delivered  a  forfeit  of  $1.50  for  each  bale  short 
of  the  number  is  to  be  paid.  The  transactions  of  the  farmer  with  the 
factory  are  very  satisfactory.  The  morning  paper  informs  both  parties 
of  the  price  of  cotton  the  world  over.  The  farmer  is  the  better  for  saving 
the  charges  of  the  factor,  and  the  mill  saves  agents'  charges  for  buying, 
drayage,  and  freight,  so  that  they  agree  easily  with  one  another.  Cotton 
brokers  at  the  chief  milling  points,  and  even  the  spinners  themselves  in 
Europe  and  America,  receive  daily  offers  from  peripatetic  cotton  buyers 
at  numerous  points  in  the  interior  to  furnish  cotton  on  through  bills  of 
lading  at  10  to  15  points  (50  to  75  cents  a  bale)  above  cost,  insurance, 
and  freight.  The  farmer  brings  his  cotton  to  the  town  where  some  mer- 
chant or  banker  has  advanced  to  him,  several  buyers  bid  on  it,  and  the 
purchaser  settles  at  the  banker's  or  the  merchant's,  discharging  the 
farmer's  debt  and  giving  him  the  residue.  The  cotton  is  put  on  the  rail- 
road platform  to  be  shipped  to  the  nearest  compress  and  start  on  its 
journeyings.  A  large  part  of  the  business  is  transacted  by  the  great 
exporting  companies,  many  of  them  large  concerns  with  the  command 
of  much  capital,  whose  business  it  is  to  move  most  of  the  world's  crops 
from  producer  to  consumer.  They  are  satisfied  to  clear  an  annual  net 
profit  of  6  per  cent  on  the  immense  capital  employed,  and  in  doing  this 
it  is  to  their  interest  to  cheapen  the  intermediate  costs  and  bring  the 
producer  and  consumer  close  together.  As  an  evidence  of  the  reduction 
made  in  these  costs,  it  will  be  noticed  that  the  transaction  of  these 
transfers  by  the  large  cities  has  been  a  great  source  of  profit  to  them, 
and  consequently  of  cost  to  the  other  parties,  and  of  late  years  the 
annual  sales  of  spot  cotton  in  these  cities  has  greatly  decreased.  This 
decline  has  been  between  1876  and  1894,  in  New  Orleans,  from  31^  per 
cent  of  the  crop  to  12£  per  cent;  in  Memphis,  from  9f  percent  to  4£;  in 
Savannah,  from  5J  per  cent  to  2-f-;  in  Charleston,  from  7  per  cent  to  2§. 
More  direct  and  cheaper  methods  have  skipped  over  these  intermediary 
markets. 


THE  HANDLING  AND  USES  OF  COTTON. 


383 


COST  OF  TRANSPORTATION. 

The  cost  of  transportation  varies  with  each  locality  and  the  rates  of 
freight,  which  are  always  fluctuating-.  Competitive  lines,  water  trans- 
portation, the  facility  of  arranging*  through  freights,  each  brings  its 
quota  to  complicate  the  problem.  Distance  is  by  no  means  a  determin- 
ing factor.  It  has  sometimes  cost  less  to  ship  cotton  from  the  interior 
to  Liverpool  than  to  the  New  England  mills.  Changes  are  constantly 
occurring.  The  new  Manchester  Canal  delivers  cotton  to  the  mills  30 
cents  a  bale  cheaper  on  the  average  than  it  is  delivered  ex  ship  from 
Liverpool.  Notwithstanding  the  general  cheapening  of  transportation 
that  has  taken  place,  the  percentage  of  this  cost  upon  the  total  cost 
since  the  decline  in  the  price  of  cotton  is  greater  than  when  the  staple 
sold  high.  It  imposes  an  additional  burden  on  importers  and  operates 
with  other  factors  to  render  the  manufacture  of  the  raw  material  where 
it  is  grown  more  remunerative  than  it  can  be  at  distant  points,  and  this 
will  probably  continue  to  be  the  case  unless  some  unforeseen  cause 
raises  the  price  of  cotton.  It  may  be  thought  that  as  the  product  will 
finally  have  to  be  distributed  the  cost  of  transportation  will  attach  as 
much  to  the  manufactured  article  as  to  the  raw  material.  This  is  a  mis- 
take, however.  The  transportation  of  cotton  costs  more  than  the  trans- 
portation of  goods.  Where  the  first  is  charged  47  cents  per  hundred- 
weight, the  latter  goes  through  for  30  cents  per  hundredweight.  Some 
idea  of  the  charges  and  cost  of  transporting  cotton  will  be  conveyed 
by  the  following  statement,  giving  these  data  regarding  its  shipment 
to  Liverpool,  where  more  of  the  crop  has  been  always  shipped  than 
elsewhere: 

Cost  of  shipping  a  500-pound  bale  of  cotton  from  the  Atlantic  Slope  of  the  cotton  States  to 

Liverpool. 


Items  of  cost. 


Grading per  bale. 

Weighing do... 

Drayage do. . . 

Purchasing do. . . 

Compressing  and  freight  to  port do... 

Port  to  Liverpool do... 

Liverpool  dock  dues,  porterage,  customs,  insurance,  forwarding 
cartage  to  railroad,  cartage  to  mill per  bale . 

Total  per  bale 

6  per  cent  tare 

Total  cost  per  bale 

Percentage  of  cost  of  transportation  on  total  cost 


Price  per 

pound,  5 

cents ;  first 

cost  of  500- 


Price  per 
pound. 8 
cents :  first 
cost  of  500- 
pound  bale,  pound  bale,  pound  bale, 
$40.  $55. 


Price  per 
pound,  11 
cents;  first 
cost  of  500- 


6.64J 


24 


7.  54* 


8.44J 


With  the  improvements  in  machinery  and  increasing  skill  in  its  man- 
agement, manufactured  products  have  a  tendency  to  become  cheaper 
much  more  rapidly  than  the  raw  material  out  of  which  they  are  made. 
The  production  of  the  material  depends  on  natural  conditions  beyond 


384 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


human  control;  the  manufactured  goods  are  the  result  of  human  effort. 
In  1779  the  value  of  the  raw  cotton  in  yarn  was  as  ]  to  8;  in  18G0  it  was 
as  6f  to  lljjr;  in  1887  it  was  as  G£  to  9£.  Therefore  every  burden  put 
on  the  raw  material,  such  as  the  above  increase  in  the  percentage  cost 
of  transportation  to  total  cost,  must  obstruct  manufactures.  That  it 
has  already  done  so  will  be  seen  by  the  changes  which  have  taken  place 
in  the  consumption  of  cotton  by  various  countries  in  a  series  of  years, 
as  shown  in  the  following  table: 

Percentages  of  the  cotton  crop  consumed  in  each  country,  1859-1893. 


Place  of  consumption. 

1859. 

1869. 

1879. 

1889. 

Per  cent. 
40 

28 

1893. 

Per  cent. 
55 
16 

6 
19.4 

3.6 

Per  cent. 
48 
19 

3 
27 

3 

Per  cent. 
36 
25 

3 
32 

4 

Per  cent. 
35 

35 

24 
8 

20 

10 

Total 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

DISTRIBUTION. 


Manufacturing  is  evidently  becoming  less  the  monopoly  of  any  one 
nation,  and  it  is  equally  plain  that  it  tends  more  and  more  toward  the 
sources  of  supply.  The  last  observation  is  supported  by  what  is  taking 
place  in  India,  next  in  importance  to  the  Southern  States  as  a  cotton- 
producing  country.  The  manufacture  has  increased  there  283  per  cent 
since  1880,  and  her  cotton  goods  are  supplanting  those  of  Great  Britain 
in  Chiua  and  the  East.  The  rapid  progress  made  recently  in  this  direc- 
tion in  the  cotton  States  leads  the  growers  of  the  staple  to  hope  that 
it  will  continue  to  grow,  and  that  savings  secured  in  the  transporta- 
tion and  handling  of  cotton  would  open  up  a  market  not  only  for  this 
crop  but  for  all  other  crops  necessary  for  the  support  of  a  large  manu- 
facturing population. 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS. 

By  B.  W.  Kilgore, 
Assistant  Chemist,  North  Carolina  Experiment  Station. 

The  products  of  the  cotton  plant  used  as  food  for  live  stock  are  the 
seed,  cottou-seed  cake  or  meal  prepared  from  the  seed,  and  cotton-seed 
hulls. 

Cotton  as  it  is  picked  from  the  plant  consists  of  seed  and  floer  or  lint 
adhering  to  and  covering  the  seed,  in  the  proportion,  by  weight,  of 
slightly  less  than  one-third  fiber  and  rather  more  than  two-thirds  seed. 
A  crop  of  9,000,000  bales  in  the  United  States  would  therefore  yield 
about  4,500,000  tons  of  seed.  The  seed  is  composed  of  practically  equal 
parts  of  seed  coat  or  hull  and  kernel.  From  1,000  pounds  of  the  latter 
250  to  300  pounds  of  oil  is  expressed,  leaving  700  to  750  pounds»of  cake 
or  meal  to  the  ton  of  seed.1 

Prior  to  the  era  of  cotton  seed  oil  mills  raw  and  cooked  cotton  seed 
was  fed  largely  to  cattle  and  sheep,  and  to  a  limited  extent  to  hogs. 
The  larger  portion  of  seed,  however,  was  used  as  fertilizer,  though  in 
some  of  the  richer  cotton  States  the  seed  was  sometimes  thrown  into 
rivers,  buried,  burned,  or  otherwise  disposed  of  in  the  easiest  way 
possible. 

Cotton-seed  cake  is  of  two  kiuds — that  from  the  whole  seed,  or  unde- 
corticated  cake,  and  decorticated  cake,  or  cake  from  the  kernels  after 
the  hulls  have  been  separated.  The  ground  cakes  give  the  cotton  seed 
meal  of  commerce.  Formerly  un decorticated  cake  was  largely  made 
and  used,  but  there  are  now  probably  not  more  than  two  mills  in  the 
United  States  making  it.2 

Cotton-seed  meal  was  fed  in  the  United  States  earlier  than  I8603 
aud  in  England  previous  to  1864.4  The  Southern  States  did  not  feed 
much  meal  at  first,  aud  most  of  it  went  to  the  Eastern  and  Northeast- 
ern States  and  to  England.  Its  popularity  as  a  feed  has,  however, 
gradually  grown  until  now  it  is  universally  esteemed  aud  large  quan- 
tities are  annually  used  for  feed  aud  fertilizer. 

At  the  oil  mills  the  cotton  seed  is  cut  up  and  crushed,  and  the  hulls 
or  seed  coats  separated  from  the  kernels  by  means  of  screens  aud  shak- 
ers. The  hulls  are  dry,  tough,  and  tasteless,  and  are  covered  with  short 
cotton  fiber.     They  were  at  first  considered  worthless  for  feeding 


1  Tenth  U.  S.  Census;  D.  A.  Tompkins  in  Manufacturers'  Record,  1894,  p.  257. 

2  D.  A.  Tompkins,  communicated  in  letter. 

3  U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Rpt.  1864,  p.  275. 

*  Jour.  Roy.  Agl.  Soc,  1864,  pt.  1.  p.  235. 

1993— No.  33 25  385 


386 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


purposes,  and  were  a  nuisance  at  the  oil  mills,  where,  until  about 
1880,  they  were  burned  as  fuel  and  are  still  thus  disposed  of  to  a  very 
limited  extent.  Ten  out  of  10  oil  mills  mentioned  in  the  Tenth  United 
States  Census  reported  the  sale  of  hulls  for  feed,  and  it  is  likely  they 
were  used  as  feed  before  this,  probably  as  early  as  1870  in  individual 
cases.  So  popular  have  they  become  as  a  coarse  fodder  that  the  oil 
mills  now  readily  sell  the  greater  portion  of  their  output  at  from  $2.50 
to  $4  a  ton. 

COMPOSITION    OF    COTTON-SEED    PRODUCTS. 

Cotton  seed,  of  course,  varies  with  the  soil,  season,  and  climate;  but 
its  composition  with  reference  to  these  conditions  has  been  studied 
but  little.  Beyond  the  observation  of  cotton-seed  oil  mills  that  the 
seed  in  a  wet  season  contains  more  oil  of  poorer  quality  than  in  a  dry 
season,  we  know  little  of  the  change  in  its  composition  due  to  different 
causes.  The  composition  of  cotton-seed  meal,  of  course,  depends  on 
the  composition  of  the  seed  and  the  completeness  of  separation  of  hulls 
and  kernels  and  expression  of  oil  from  the  latter.  With  the  improve- 
ment in  oil-mill  machinery  the  percentage  of  oil  left  in  the  cake  has 
been  much  reduced,  as  is  seen  from  the  averages  of  analyses  made  in 
consecutive  years.     (See  p.  133.) 

It  is  believed  that  the  average  of  the  analyses  made  since  1888  repre- 
sents more  nearly  the  composition  of  the  cotton-seed  meal  of  to  day 
than  any  of  the  previous  ones.  Cotton-seed  hulls  from  different  mills 
and  even  from  the  same  mill  vary  widely  in  composition,  owing  to  the 
adherence  of  larger  or  smaller  quantities  of  the  finely  broken  kernels. 
The  composition  of  the  cotton  plant  after  the  cotton  is  picked  indicates 
it  to  be  a  very  good  coarse  food,  but  it  is  extremely  hard  and  tough, 
and  would  have  to  be  manipulated  before  animals  would  eat  it. 

DIGESTIBILITY   OF   COTTON  PRODUCTS. 

The  coefficients  of  digestibility  of  cotton  products  are  brought 
together  in  the  following  table: 

Coefficients  of  digestibility  of  cotton-seed  products. 


Ration. 

Pn 

a 

M 
GO 

6 

a  . 

S  P 

®.S 

.  a 
o 

S 

a 
p 

a 
'3 

o 

CO 

3 

'8 

0 

| 
2 
< 

"3 

to  ra 

beh 

£  R 

CD 

CD 

3 

D 

.a 

31 

<4 

Experiments  with  ruminants. 

Whole  raw  cotton  seed  in  ration  with  corn  silage. 
Whole  roasted  cotton  seed  in  ration  with  corn 

1 

1 

2 
2 

P.ct. 
66.1 

55.9 

74 

81.1 

73.3 

76.1 

53.4 
42.4 
39.8 
41.2 

P.ct. 
67.9 

47 

84.7 

88.7 

87.8 

87.1 

74.8 
5 

6.8 
5.8 

P.ct. 
63.6 

44.2 
87.1 

P.ct. 

87.1 

71.7 
87.6 
100 
89.7 
92.4 

89.2 
73.8 
85.1 
78.8 

P.ct. 
49.6 

51.4 
83.7 
67.8 
61.5 

71 

53.6 
31.8 
36.9 
34.1 

P.ct. 
75.5 

65.9 

P.ct. 
43.3 

Cotton-seed  meal  in  ration  with  clover  hay 

Do 

1 
1 

2 

4 

46.4 
15.5 

12.4 
51.8 
43.1 
48 

31.5 

Undecorticated  Egyptian  cotton-seed  meal  and 

2 
2 

2 
4 

4 
5 
4 
9 

17.6 

23 

1)0 

19.9 

21.6 

THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS. 


387 


These  data  need  no  comment  except  as  regards  whole,  raw,  and 
roasted  seed.  The  digestibility  of  these  was  determined  on  two  portions 
of  the  same  lot  of  seed,  one  portion  being  fed  raw  and  the  other  after 
roasting.  Comparison  of  the  coefficients  shows  that  10  per  cent  less  of 
the  dry  matter  of  roasted  seed,  21  per  cent  less  of  the  protein,  15  per 
cent  less  of  the  fat,  and  9.5  per  cent  less  of  the  fiber  was  digested  than 
in  the  case  of  the  raw  seed,  while  1.7  per  cent  more  of  the  nitrogen-free 
extract  was  digested  from  the  roasted  than  from  the  raw  seed.  Ladd's1 
experiments  also  show  raw  cotton-seed  meal  to  be  more  digestible  than 
either  steamed  or  cooked  meal.  Siewert2  compared  the  composition  of 
cotton-seed  hulls  before  feeding  with  that  of  hulls  separated  from  the 
solid  excrement  of  animals,  and  claims  that  they  were  indigestible  and 
worthless. 

DOES  COTTON-SEED  MEAD  AFFECT  THE  DIGESTIBILITY  OF  CARBONACEOUS  FOODS? 

It  is  usually  stated 3  that  highly  nitrogenous  foods  like  cotton-seed 
meal  have  no  influence  on  the  digestibility  of  coarse,  carbonaceous 
foods  in  rations,  and  vice  versa.  The  results  of  two  series  of  experi- 
ments at  the  North  Carolina  Station  in  which  cotton-seed  hulls  and 
corn  silage  were  each  fed  in  connection  with  cotton-seed  meal  in  vary- 
ing proportions  indicate  that  the  cotton-seed  meal  influenced  the 
digestibility  of  each  of  these  coarse  feeding  stuffs.  The  digestibility 
of  the  cotton-seed  hulls  and  silage  when  fed  alone  and  when  fed  in 
various  proportions  with  cotton-seed  meal  is  shown  in  the  following 
table : 


Digestibility  of  cotton-seed  hulls  and  corn  silage  fed  alone  andivith  cotton-seed  meal. 


-2  ■ 
"3  a 

as 

i2;  += 

Dry 
matter. 

Pro- 
tein. 

Fat. 

Nitro- 
gen- 
free 
extract. 

Crude 
fiber. 

Nutritive  ratio. 

Ration. 

By 
actual 
diges- 
tion. 

As  cal- 
culated 
from 
single 
foods. 

Cotton-seed  hulls : 

4 
1 
2 
2 
1 
4 
2 
1 
2 
2 

Per  et. 
39.8 

40.6 

41.1 

47.7 

48.5 

44.1 

44.3 

53.2 

60.1 

67.4 

Per  et. 
6.8 

—12.6 

—35.7 

-36 

-22.3 

—43 

—50 

34.4 

19 

24.5 

Per  et. 
85.1 

78.4 

78 

78.9 

83 

72.4 

79.7 

66 

79.3 

54.7 

Per  et. 
36.9 

50.2 

48 

57.1 

53.6 

48.2 

53.5 

60.5 

68.9 

76.3 

Per  et. 
43.1 

33.5 

40.1 

45 

49.8 

48 

45.7 

43.2 

57.5 

64.3 

With  cotton-seed  meal  (7  parts  of 

1 :10.  8 
1:  9.71 
1:  7.52 
1:  5.89 
1:  4.02 
1:  3.18 

1-  6  93 

With  cotton -seed  meal  (6  parts  of 

1-  7  69 

With  cotton  seed  meal  (4  parts  of 

1  •  5.  62 

With  cotton-seec'  meal  (3  parts  of 

1-  4  62 

With  cotton-seed  meal  (2  parts  of 

1:  3.28 

With  cotton-seed  meal  (1£  parts  of 

1:  2*71 

Corn  silage : 

With  cotton-seed  meal  (12  parts  of 

1:  6.29 
1 :  4.  98 

1:  5.57 

With  cotton-seed  meal  (8  parts  of 

1:  4.01 

a  North  Carolina  Sta.  Buls.  97, 122. 
6  North  Carolina  Sta.  Buls.  97  and  111. 


c  North  Carolina  Sta.  Buls.  111. 
d  North  Carolina  Sta.  Buls.  97, 123. 


'Pott,  Die  Landwirtschaftlichen  Futtermittel,  p.  133. 

2Landw.  Vers.  Stat,,  30  (1884),  p.  145. 

3  Armsby,  Manual  of  Cattle  Feeding,  p.  277. 


388 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


The  corn  silage  fed  in  the  itbove  trials  was  all  from  the  same  lot. 
From  these  figures  it  appears  that  the  digestibility  of  the  carbohydrates 
has  been  materially  increased  in  the  case  of  both  coarse  fodders  by 
feeding  cotton-seed  meal,  while  there  Avas  in  all  cases  a  loss  of  protein 
which  with  the  hull  rations  was  much  beyond  what  the  hulls  contained. 
The  nutritive  ratios  of  these  rations  as  actually  digested  and  as  calcu- 
lated from  the  digestion  coefficients  of  the  different  feeding  stuffs  also 
show  that  these  foods  have  affected  the  digestibility  of  each  other,  and 
indicate  that  in  rations  of  this  kind,  at  least,  much  wider  nutritive 
ratios  are  fed  than  is  generally  supposed. 

FEEDING   COTTON-SEED    PRODUCTS   FOR   BEEF    PRODUCTION. 


ENGLISH    EXPERIMENTS. 

Experiments  have  been  made  on  bullocks  at  Woburn,1  England,  in 
which  decorticated  and  undecorticated  cotton-seed  cake  have  been 
compared  with  each  other,  and  decorticated  cake  has  been  compared 
with  various  grain  rations.  In  compiling  these  the  nutritive  ratios  of 
the  rations  have  been  calculated  only  in  those  cases  in  which  the  com- 
position of  all  of  the  feeding  stuff's  used  was  given ;  and  the  digesti- 
ble organic  matter  and  the  amounts  necessary  to  produce  1  pound 
of  gain  have  been  calculated  only  where  the  composition  of  the  more 
important  foods  was  given.  The  total  cost  of  each  pound  of  gain  and 
of  the  additional  foods  for  1  pound  of  gain  are  based  on  estimates  of 
the  experimenters.2  The  results  of  these  experiments  are  summarized 
in  the  table  below,  followed  by  further  details  and  deductions : 

Feeding  experimetits  for  beef  at  Woburn,  England,  with  cottonseed  cake  combined  with 

other  feeding  stuffs. 


Digest- 

Digest- 

ible     Cost  of     Total 

ible 

Nutri- 

Average 

organic .  concen-  cost  of 

Daily  ration  per  animal 

organic 
matter 

tive 
ratio  of 

daily 
gain  in 

matter  1  trated   food  per 
eaten    food  per  pound 

in  daily 

ration. 

weight. 

per 

pound  |      of 

ration. 

pound 

of  gain.    gain,  a 

of  gain. 

1887-88.     Coarse   fodder:   straw  chaff,  hay   chaff, 

and  roots,  alike  to  all: 

Lot  1,  3  pounds  decorticated  cotton-seed  cake,  3 

Pounds. 

Pounds. 

Pounds. 

Cents. 

Cents. 

pounds  linseed  cake,  and  3  pounds  maize  meal. 

14.63 

1:  4.82 

2.65 

5.52 

5.29  j 

Lot  2,  3  pounds  bean  meal,  3  pounds  oats,  and 

3  pounds  barley. 

14.45 

1:  6.56 

2.35 

6. 14 

6.40  j 

Lot  3,  3  pounds  oats,  3  pounds  "gritted"  wheat, 

and  3  pounds  barley 

14.44 

1:  8.53 

2.15 

6.71 

6.46    

1889-00 : 

Lot  1,   4.33  pounds  decorticated  cotton-seed 

cake,  4.34  pounds  linseed  cake,  13.73  pounds 

hay  chatf,  and  40.18  pounds  roots 

16.  56    1 :  4.  67 

3.12 

5.30 

8.95 

Lot  2,   2.12  pounds   decorticated  cotton-seed 

cake,  2.17  pounds  linseed  cake,  15.49  pounds 

hay  chaff,  and  44.27  pounds  roots 

14.97 

1:  5.95 

2.54 

5.89 



8.73 

a  Where  the  composition  of  the  foods  used  was  not  given,  hay  chaff  was  assumed  to  contain  78.5 
percent  of  organic  matter,  ruta-bagas  and  mangel-wurzels  10.4  per  cent,  and  wheat  straw  80.8  per  cent. 
Wheat  was  assumed  to  be  as  digestible  as  barley. 

'All  the  Woburn  experiments  were  made  under  the  auspices  of  the  Royal  Agricul- 
tural Society  by  Dr.  Voelcker. 

-This  explanation  applies  to  all  other  similarly  presented  experiments. 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS. 


389 


Feeding  experiments  for  beef  at  Woburn,  England,  etc. — Continued. 


Digest- 

Digest- 

ible 

Costof 

Total 

ihle 

Nutri-  Average 

organic 

concen- 

cost of 

Daily  ration  pe.-  animal. 

organic 
matter 

tive 
ratio  of 

daily 
gain  in 

matter 
eaten 

trated 
food  per 

food  per 
pound 

in  daily 

ration. 

weight. 

per 

pound 

of 

ration. 

pound 
of  gain. 

of  gain. 

gain,  a 

1889-90 : 

Lot  3,  no  grain,  17.03  pounds  liay  chaff,  and 

Pounds. 

;  Pounds. 

Pounds. 

Cents. 

Cents. 

48.44  pounds  root  s 

13.29 

1:10.52           1.36 

9.77 

12.00 

1888-89.  Coarse  fodder;  hay  chaff  and  roots,  alike 

to  all : 

Lot  1,    3.3    pounds    decorticated    cotton-seed 

cake,  2.88  pounds  linseed  cake,  and  4  pounds 

14.58 

1  •  4.  21 

2  21 

6  59 

7  60 

Lot  2,  3.3  pounds  undecorticated  cotton-seed 

cake,  2.88  pounds  linseed  cake,  and  4  pounds 

13.  83 

1:  5.15           1.97 

7.02 

8.38 

1890-91.  Coarse  fodder:  hay  chaff  and  roots,  alike 

to  all: 

Lot  1,  5.03  pounds  decorticated    cotton-seed 

cake,  3  pounds  linseed  cake,  and  1  pound 

.17.17 

2.38 

7.21 

6.42 

Lot  2,  5.07  pounds  undecorticated  cotton  seed 

cake,  3  pounds  linseed  cake,  and  1  pound 

15.89 

1.84 

8.63 

7.34 

1878-79.  Coarse  fodder:    roots   and  wheat  chaff, 

1 

alike  to  all : 

Lot  1,  7.09  pounds  decorticated  cotton-seed 

17  13 

2  32 

7  :i9 

10  43 

15.62 

2.29 

6.81 

12.63 

1880.  Coarse  fodder:   hay  chaff,  wheat  chaff,  and 

roots,  alike  to  all: 

Lot  1,   7.7    pounds    decorticated    cotton-seed 

16.24 

2. 60 

6.24 

10.43 

Lot  2,  15.4  pounds  lirseed  cake. 

15.17 

2  12 

7.15 

17.68 

1880-81.    Coarse  fodder;    hay  chaff  and  mangel- 

worzel : 

Lot  1,  9.48  pounds  decorticated  cotton-seed 

cake,  9  48  pounds  maize  meal 

19.70 

2.63 

7.49 

12.58 

17.68 

1    64 

10.81 

23.84 

a  Where  the  composition  of  the  foods  used  was  not  given,  hay  chaff  was  assumed  to  contain  78.5  per 
cent  of  organic  matter,  ruta-bagas  and  mangel- wurzels  10.4  per  cent,  and  wheat  straw  80.8  per  cent. 
Wheat  was  assumed  to  be  as  digestible  as  barley. 

The  experiments  of  1887-88 J  were  made  "with  a  view  to  seeing  how 
far  home-grown  food  could  be  utilized  and  how  it  would  compare  with 
cake."  Twelve  3-year-old  Hereford  bullocks  were  fed  during  112  days 
in  three  lots,  one  lot  receiving  cotton  seed  cake,  linseed  cake,  and  maize 
meal,  another  lot  bean  meal,  oats,  and  barley,  and  the  third  lot  "grit- 
ted" wheat,  oats,  and  barley.  All  three  lots  had  the  same  kind  and 
amount  of  coarse  fodder.  The  first-mentioned  lot  was  fed  in  box  stalls, 
the  second  in  the  open  yard,  and  the  third  under  a  shed ;  but  no  differ- 
ence in  the  result  is  attributed  to  these  different  conditions.  The  rate 
and  cost  of  gain  show  "clearly  the  superiority  of  the  cake  feeding; 
*  *  *  the  meat  of  the  cake-fed  beasts  was  pronounced  by  experts  to 
be  'riper'  than  that  of  the  bean-fed  beasts,"  and  the  latter  was  superior 
to  that  of  the  wheat  fed  lot. 

In  1889-90 2  the  experiments  were  to  see  "to  what  extent  cake  would 
replace  hay  in  feeding  bullocks."  Fifteen  3-year-old  Hereford  bullocks 
were  fed  during  three  periods  of  40,  41,  and  29  days,  making  110  days 

1  Jour.  Roy.  Agl.  Soc.  England,  ser.  2,  24  (1888),  pp.  481-486. 

2  Jour.  Roy.  Agl.  Soc.  England,  ser.  2, 1  (1890),  pp.  399-407. 


390  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

in  all.  A  ration  of  cotton- seed  cake  and  linseed  cake  was  fed  to  lot  1, 
one  half  this  amount  to  lot  2,  and  none  to  lot  3,  the  diminished  quan- 
tity of  oil  cakes  being  made  up  for  by  an  increasing  ration  of  hay  chaff 
and  roots.  The  bullocks  receiving  the  full  quantity  of  oil  cakes  gained 
on  an  average  3.87,  3.05,  and  2.20  pounds  daily  per  head  during  the 
respective  periods;  those  receiviug  the  half  ration  of  oil  cakes  gained 
3.18,  2.56,  and  1.(53  pounds,  and  those  having  roots  and  hay  only,  1.52, 
2.06,  and  0.12  pounds.  The  average  gains  for  the  whole  period  of  110 
days  are  given  in  the  table,  together  with  their  cost,  which  shows  the 
single  quantity  of  cake  to  have  been  the  most  economical  meat  pro 
ducer,  unless  the  manurial  value  of  the  rations  is  taken  into  considera- 
tion, in  which  case  double  quantity  of  oil  cakes  was  the  most  economical, 
and  far  more  so  than  roots  and  hay  alone. 

The  object  of  the  experiments  in  1888, 1889,  and  1890 '  was  to  investi- 
gate the  comparative  feeding  values  of  decorticated  and  un decorticated 
cotton-seed  cake  when  fed  in  like  amounts.  In  1888-89  eight  3-year- 
old  Hereford  bullocks  were  fed  in  two  lots  during  three  periods  of  62, 
36,  and  47  days,  respectively.  The  4  bullocks  receiving  decorticated 
cotton-seed  cake  gained  2.76,  2.01,  and  1.64  pounds  per  head  daily  dur- 
ing the  respective  periods,  while  the  4  on  undecorticated  cake  gained 
2.47,  1.65,  and  1.56  pounds.  During  1890-91  17  3-year-old  Shorthorns 
were  fed  in  three  periods  of  41  days  each,  the  8  on  decorticated  cake 
gaining  2.4,  2.48,  and  2.28  pounds  per  head  daily,  and  the  9  on  unde- 
corticated cake  1.33,  2.36,  and  1.82  pounds.  The  foods  other  than  the 
cakes  in  each  of  the  two  trials  were  practically  the  same,  and  any  dif- 
ferences in  results  are  attributed  to  the  cakes.  The  gains  for  the  whole 
periods  and  the  cost  are  given  in  the  table  and  are  favorable  in  both 
cases  to  the  decorticated  cake.  The  experimenter  considers  "that  for 
feeding  purposes  alone,  omitting  manurial  value,  decorticated  cotton- 
seed cake  is  fully  worth  50  shillings  a  ton  more  than  undecorticated 
cotton  seed  cake." 

The  experiments  in  1878,  1879,  1880,  and  18812  were  to  test  the  com- 
parative value  of  a  mixture  of  decorticated  cotton-seed  cake  and  maize 
meal  against  linseed  cake  as  additional  foods  for  fattening  bullocks,  the 
other  foods  (roots  and  hay)  being  alike.  In  the  first  trial  2  lots  of  4 
Herefords  each  were  fed  for  69  days,  and  in  the  second  and  third  trials 
2  lots  of  3  bullocks  each  were  fed  for  63  days  in  each  case.  The  gains 
and  cost  lead  the  experimenter  to  conclude  that  "  in  three  successive 
years  a  mixture  of  equal  parts  of  decorticated  cotton-seed  cake  and 
maize  meal  has  produced  a  larger  increase  in  live  weight,  and  at  less 
cost  than  linseed  cake." 

Other  feeding  experiments3  with  decorticated  cotton-seed  cake  in 

1  Jour.  Roy.  Agl.  Soc  England,  ser.  3,  2  (1891),  pp.  585-594. 

2  Jour.  Roy.  Agl.  Soc.  England,  ser.  2, 16  (1880), p.  149,  and  17  (1881),  p.  654. 

aJour.  Roy.  Agl.  Soc.  England,  2d  ser.,  vols.  16-23,  pp.,  131, 112, 301, 209, 337, 348, 236, 
284, 289. 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS. 


391 


addition  to  other  foods  have  also  been  made  with  bullocks  at  Woburn 
in  connection  with  studies  on  the  production  of  manure.  The  results 
of  these  experiments  are  brought  together  in  the  following  table : 

Feeding  experiments  for  beef  at  Woburn,  England,  with  cottonseed  cale  in  combination 

with  other  feeding  stuffs. 


Daily  ration  per  animal. 


Digest- 
■NTiim    'Average     ible     l^erage 


period. 


mala. 


animals. 


daily 
ration. 


Digest- 
ible 
organic 

galn    i^ten1" 
in  live  ■   eaten 

of  gain. 


1879: 

First  period,  4  pounds  cotton-seed  cake,  6.4 
pounds  maize  meal,  8  pounds  wheat  chaff,  (a) 

and  48  pounds  white  turnips 

Second  period,  same 

1880: 

First  period,  same  as  in  1879,  except  mangel- 

wurzels  in  place  of  turnips 

Second  period,  same 

1881: 

First  period,  5^  pounds  cotton-seed  cake,  8.53 
pounds  maize  meal,  10}  pounds  wheat  chaff, 
and  64  pounds  white  turnips 

Second  period,  same 

1882: 

First  period,  3£  pounds  cotton-seed  cake,  5£ 
pounds  maize  meal,  6f  pounds  wheat  chaff, 
and  40  pounds  white  turnips 

Second  period,  same 

1883: 

First  period,  2.92  pounds  cotton-seed  cake, 
4.67  pounds  maize  meal,  5.83  pounds  wheat 
chaff,  and  35  pounds  white  turnips 

Second  period,  same 

1884: 

First  period,  same  as  1883 

Second  period,  same 

1883: 

First  period,  7.56  pounds  cotton-seed  cake, 
10.25  pounds  wheat  chaff,  and  40.98  pounds 
mangel- wurzels 

Seconcf  period,  8.47  pounds  maize  meal,  10.6 
pounds  wheat  chaff  and  42.35  pounds  man- 
gel-wurzels 

Third  period,  10.6  pounds  wheat  chaff  and 

42.35  pounds  mangel-wurzels 

1884: 

First  period,  7.21  pounds  cotton-seed  cake, 
9.77  pounds  wheat  chaff,  and  39.06  pounds 
mangel-wurzels 

Second  period,  7.81  pounds  maize  meal,  9.77 
pounds  wheat  chaff,  and  39.06  pounds  man- 
gel-wurzels   

Third  period,  10.42  pounds  wheat  chaff  and 

41.67  pounds  mangel-wurzels 

1885: 

First  period,  3.18  pounds  cotton-seed  cake, 
5.08  pounds  maize  meal.  6.36  pounds  wheat 
chaff,  and  38.18  pounds  white  turnips 

Second  period,  same 

1886: 

First  period,  3£  pounds  cotton-seed  cake,  5£ 
pounds  maize  meal,  8  pounds  wheat  chaff, 
and  42.19  pounds  ruta-bagas 

Second  period,  same 

Third  period,  same 


Days. 
35 
35 


Pounds.  Pounds.  Pounds.  Pounds. 


4        1, 086 
4        1, 121 


1,032 
1,102 


1.343 
1,358 


1,080 
1,064 


1,146 
1,124 


1,044 
1,040 


1,155 

1,214 
1,059 

1,119 

1,100 
1,  031 


3  1,033 

4  1, 034 


1,110 
1,107 
1,105 


14.19 
14.19 

1.03 
2.02 

1.41 
1.41 

2.48 

2.07 

11.03 
11.03 

3.39 

2.67 

9.49 
9.49 

2.03 
1.96 

10.47 
10.47 

2.91 
1.76 

12.42 

.72 

13.79 

1.38 

7.68 

.05 

11.97 

1.63 

12.86 

1.78 

7.55 

—.33 

11.51 
11.51 

1.37 
1.25 

13.20 
13.20 
13.20 

3.50 
3.11 

3.10 

13.80 
7.02 


3.25 
4.14 


4.68 
4.85 


3.60 
5.95 


17.42 


7.37 

7.22 


8.42 
9.21 


3.77 
4.25 
4.26 


a  Wheat  chaff  in  the  ahove  experiments  was  assumed  to  contain  80.8  per  cent  of  organic  matter, 
swedes  and  mangel-wurzels  10.8  percent,  and  white  turnips,  where  the  composition  is  not  given,  9.4 
per  cent. 

b  There  were  four  animals  in  this  experiment ;  one  lost  weight  and  one  was  too  wild  to  weigh,  and 
hoth  are  excluded. 

c  There  were  four  animals  in  each  of  these  experiments,  but  in  every  case  one  was  sick  for  several 
days  and  lost  weight,  and  was  excluded  in  making  up  results. 


392  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

In  1879,  1880,  and  1881  the  amounts  of  different  kinds  of  feeding 
stuffs  eaten  were  the  same,  i.  e.,  5  hundredweight  of  decorticated 
cotton-seed  cake,  8  hundred  weight  of  maize  meal,  60  hundredweight  of 
roots,  and  10  hundredweight  of  wheat-straw  chaff,  the  kind  of  roots  or 
substitute  for  roots  being  different  each  year,  as  indicated  in  the  table. 
During  the  experiments  of  1882,  the  first  series  of  1883  and  1884,  and 
those  of  1885  the  animals  ate  the  same  total  amounts  of  foods,  which 
were  just  one-half  the  amounts  given  in  the  experiments  of  the  previous 
three  years. 

In  1886  each  lot  of  animals  ate  2£  hundredweight  of  decorticated 
cotton-seed  cake,  4  hundredweight  of  maize  meal,  6  hundredweight  of 
wheat-straw  chaff,  and  31.68  hundredweight  of  ruta-bagas.  The  bul- 
locks were  3-year-old  Herefords,  and  the  first  two  lots  were  fed  tied  up  in 
the  feeding  boxes,  as  in  all  the  previous  experiments,  while  the  third 
lot  was  fed  loose  in  an  open  yard.  It  is  believed  that  no  difference  in 
the  gains  could  be  attributed  to  the  different  conditions  of  feeding. 
The  first  lots  of  bullocks  in  the  second  series  of  experiments  in  1883 
and  1884  each  consumed  923  pounds  of  decorticated  cotton  cake,  1,250 
pounds  of  wheat-straw  chaff',  and  5,000  pounds  of  mangel-wurzels;  the 
second  lots,  1,000  pounds  of  maize  meal,  1,250  pounds  of  wheat-straw 
chaff,  and  5,000  pounds  of  mangel-wurzels,  respectively;  the  third  lots, 
1,250  pounds  each  of  wheat-straw  chaff  and  5,000  pounds  of  mangel- 
wurzels.  The  gains  in  these  experiments  clearly  show  the  value  of  the 
additional  foods  (cotton -seed  cake  and  maize  meal),  the  straw  chaff'  and 
mangel-wurzels  not  proving  sufficient  to  maintain  the  original  body 
weight.  The  gains  in  these  experiments,  taken  as  a  whole,  are  quite 
wide  for  the  foods  to  have  been  the  same. 

AMERICAN  EXPERIMENTS. 

Griilley  and  Curtis,1  at  the  Texas  Station,  in  three  years'  experiments 
in  fattening  160  Texas  steers  and  8  cows  on  cotton-seed  products  in 
different  rations,  in  comparison  with  each  other  and  with  corn,  obtained 
results  in  all  cases  indicating  the  superior  feeding  qualities  of  cotton- 
seed products  over  corn  in  rations  with  hay,  silage,  or  hulls.  Rations 
of  cotton  seed  hulls  and  cottonseed  meal,2  or  the  former  with  silage 
added,  were  concluded  to  be  best  for  long  periods  of  fattening,  eighty 
days  and  over,  as  they  produced  larger  gains  and  more  continuous  growth 
and  fattening  than  others.  Rations  of  cotton  seed,  especially  boiled,  with 
silage,  and  of  cotton  seed,  corn,  and  hay  gave  cheaper  and  more  rapid 
gains  for  short  periods  (about  thirty  days),  but  they  loaded  the  animals 
with  fat  so  quickly  that  the  rate  of  laying  on  flesh  was  greatly  decreased, 
and  the  beef  was  not  considered  so  good.  Cotton- seed  meal  was  con 
sidered  better  for  feeding  with  silage  or  silage  and  hulls  than  cotton 

1  Texas  Sta,  Buls.  6,  10,  and  27. 

2These  rations  were  made  up  practically  of  3  and  2.6  pounds  of  hulls  to  1  of  meal, 
the  latter  having  a  nutritive  ratio  of  1:3.68.  (See  exclusive  cotton-seed  hull  and 
meal  feeding.) 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS.    393 

seed,  as  it  was  believed  that  cotton  seed  charged  the  animal  with  fat 
and  stopped  growth,  while  meal  accelerated  it.  Cotton  seed  meal  pro- 
duced greater  gains  at  greater  cost.  Cotton-seed  hulls  at  $3  per  tori 
gave  better  results  than  silage  at  $2;  raw  and  boiled  cotton  seed  at 
$7  made  much  cheaper  but  smaller  gains  than  cotton-seed  meal  at  $20, 
and  the  hay  and  corn  rations  were  the  dearest  ones  fed. 

From  the  third  year's  experiments  at  the  Texas  Station,  Connell  and 
Carson1  conclude  that  boiled  and  roasted  cotton  seed  are  more  palata- 
ble, less  laxative,  and  produce  more  rapid  gains  than  raw  cotton  seed, 
but  that  the  latter  makes  the  cheapest  gains;  and  that  roasting  seed 
does  not  repay  the  expense. 

An  8-year-old  grade  Shorthorn  steer  at  the  Alabama  Station2  made 
a  better  gain  on  cotton-seed  meal  and  cotton-seed  hulls  than  a  10-year- 
old  steer  on  cotton-seed  meal  and  hulls  and  mixed  hay,  and  the  latter 
a  better  gain  than  a  3  to  4  year-old  steer  on  corn  meal  and  cowpea-vine 
hay.  Cotton-seed  hulls  were  better  relished  by  them  than  cowpea- 
vine  hay. 

Miller,3  at  the  Maryland  Station,  found  corn-and-cob  meal,  cotton- 
seed meal,  and  wheat  bran  (15,  4,  and  2  parts  of  each,  respectively), 
which  formed  a  "well-balanced  ration"  with  coarse  foods,  to  produce  an 
average  daily  gain  of  2.78  pounds  against  a  gain  of  1.70  pounds,  at 
greater  cost,  on  corn-and-cob  meal,  which  formed  a  "poorly  balanced 
ration"  with  the  same  coarse  and  carbonaceous  foods.  The  beef  from 
the  well-balanced  ration  was  more  even  and  of  better  quality. 

In  four  years'  experiments  at  the  Pennsylvania  Station4  mixtures  of 
corn  meal  and  cotton  seed  meal  with  coaise  foods  produced  better  and 
cheaper  gains  than  corn  meal  alone  with  the  same  coarse  foods,  cotton- 
seed meal  replacing  more  than  its  own  weight  of  corn  meal  in  the 
rations  and  reducing  the  amount  of  food  required  to  produce  a  pound 
of  gain. 

The  Arkansas  Station5  found  that  cotton-seed  hulls  and  meal6  (3.3  to 
1)  produced  cheaper  and  more  rapid  gains  than  raw  seed,  hulls,  and 
cowpea  vine  hay,- the  latter  cheaper  but  slower  gains  than  cotton-seed 
meal  with  the  same  coarse  foods,  and  each  of  these  gave  better  results 
than  raw  seed  and  cowpea-vine  hay.  Cotton-seed  meal  produced  faster 
gains  in  all  cases  than  raw  seed. 

Nourse7  found  that  whole  corn  or  corn  meal  in  rations  with  silage 
and  hay  produced  better  and  more  economical  gains  than  combinations 
of  equal  parts  of  corn  or  corn  meal  and  cotton-seed  meal,  corn  meal  and 
wheat  bran,  or  cotton-seed  meal  and  wheat  bran.     The  gains  in  weight 

1  Texas  Sta.  Bui.  27. 

2  Alabama  Canebrake  Sta.  Bui.  8. 

3  Maryland  Sta.  Bui.  22. 

4 Pennsylvania  Sta.  Buls.  6, 10,  and  12  (old  ser. ). 

5  Arkansas  Sta.  Rpt.  1890,  p.  134. 

6 For  this  ration  see  exclusive  cotton-seed  hull  and  meal  feeding. 

7  Virginia  Sta.  Bui.  3. 


394 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


cost  from  9.2  cents  per  pound  on  the  widest  ratio  to  27.2  cents  on  the 
narrowest.  These  gainscost  far  more  than  they  sold  for,  but  the  increased 
quality  of  the  whole  animal  more  than  compensated  forit.  Jordan,1  at  the 
Maine  Station,  compared  equal  weights  of  corn  meal  and  cotton-seed 
meal  in  rations  with  other  foods  for  young  steers,  and  found  the  growth 
to  be  practically  the  same  on  the  two  rations.  Rations  of  cotton-seed 
meal  with  other  foods  were  fed  to  1  and  2  year-old  steers  at  the 
Massachusetts  State  Station2  without  very  remunerative  returns. 
Combinations  of  corn  meal  and  cotton-seed  meal  were  compared  at  the 
Pennsylvania  Station3  with  corn  meal  alone,  in  rations  with  the  same 
coarse  foods,  with  results  favorable  in  one  case  to  cotton- seed  meal  and 
in  another  to  corn  meal,  but  tbe  results  as  a  whole,  especially  when 
manurial  values  are  considered,  were  favorable  to  cotton-seed  meal. 
The  Maine  Station4  obtained  cheaper  growth  on  equal  weights  of  corn 
meal  and  cotton-seed  meal  with  oat  straw  than  on  the  same  amounts  of 
corn  meal  with  hay;  and  in  another  experiment5  cotton-seed  meal  sub- 
stituted for  a  portion  of  the  corn  meal  in  moderate  rations  with  hay  or 
oat  straw  diminished  the  cost  and  amount  of  food  required  to  produce 
a  pound  of  gain. 

The  data  upon  which  this  discussion  is  based  are  summarized  in  the 
following  tables: 

I. — Results  of  feeding  cotton-seed  products  for  beef  production. 


Ration. 


Dura- 
tion of 
period 
of  ex 
peri- 
ment. 


Num- 
ber of 
ani- 
mals. 


Average 

live 
weight 

of 
animals. 


Total 

Average 
dailv 

daily 
ration. 

gam  in 
live 

weight. 

Pounds. 

Pounds. 

26.69 

2.67 

31.74 

2.05 

31.68 

2.08 

28.31 

1.80 

35.67 

2.37 

Cost  of 
food  per 
pound 
of  gain. 


TEXAS  STATION  EXPEEIMENTS.  (a) 

Old  cows. 

4.74  pounds  boiled  cotton  seed,  4.02  pounds  cot- 
ton-seed meal,  11, 93  pounds  silage,  6  pounds 
corn  fodder 


3  t"  4  year-old  Texas  steers. 

5.97  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  22.7  pounds  silage, 
3.07  pounds  hay 

9.19  pounds  boiied  cotton  seed,  20.19  pounds  si- 
lage, 2.30  pounds  hay 

7.15  pounds  raw  cotton  seed,  18.80  pounds  corn 
silage,  2.36  pounds  hay 

4.39  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  20.76  pounds  corn 
silage,  1.89  pounds  bay,  8.63  pounds  corn.-and- 
cob  meal 

5.85  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  12.95  pounds  corn 
silage 

8.09  pounds  hay,  16.39  pounds  ear  corn , 


10  Texas  steers,  and  3  grades  in  pens. 

5.56  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  13.31  pounds  cotton- 
seed hulls,  20.52  pounds  corn  silage  . 


Days. 
48 


811 


13 


Pounds. 

788 


781 
863 
901 


810 
834 


a  Texas  Sta.  Buls.  6, 10,  and  27. 


30.15 
24.48 


2.20 
2 


Cents. 
3.14 


4.47 
2.85 
2.86 


3.93 
5.50 


'Maine  Sta.  Rpt.  1890,  p.  71. 

2 Massachusetts  Sta.  Rpt.  1892,  p.  92. 

3 Pennsylvania  Sta.  Rpt.  1886,  p.  228. 


4 Maine  Sta.  Rpt.  1886,  p.  73. 
6  Maine  Sta.  Rpt.  1887,  p.  89. 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS. 


395 


I. — Results  of  feeding  cotton-seed  products  for  beef  production — Continued. 


Ration. 


tex^s  station  expeeiments  (a)— continued . 
4  to  6  year-old  Texas  steers  in  pens. 

5.45  pounds  raw  cotton  seed,  11.68  pounds  corn 
silage,  4.69  pounds  hay,  6.15  pounds  corn-aud- 
cob  meal 

4.33  pounds  boiled  cotton  seed, 7.49  pounds  hay, 
and.  15.33  pounds  corn-and-cob  meal 


Dura- 
tion of 
period 
of  ex- 
peri- 
ment. 


2  to  3  year-old  Texas  steers  in  pens. 

4.78  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  7.81  lbs  cotton- 
seed hulls,  17.81  pounds  corn  silage 

6.68  pounds  roasted  cotton  seed,  3.71  pounds  bay, 

5.06  pounds  corn-and-cob  meal 

7.89  pounds  boiled  cotton  seed,  3.38  pounds  hay, 

5. 10  pounds  corn-and-cob  meal 

5.50  pounds  raw  cotton  seed,  4.26  pounds  hay, 

5.07  pounds  corn-and-cob  meal 

5.39  pounds  hay  and  13.02  pounds  corn-and-cob 

meal 

Sand  3  year-old  Shorthorn  and  Hereford  grades 
fed  in  pens. 

4.07  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  16.59  pounds  cotton- 
seed hulls,  4.97  pounds  cord-and-cob  meal 

5.91  pounds  cotton-seedmeal,  13.83 pounds  cotton- 
seed hulls,  6.31  pounds  hay 

6.22  pounds  cotton-seedmeal,  19.62  pounds  cotton- 
seed hulls,  0.57  pint  molasses  

7.97  pounds  boiled  cotton  seed,  9.18  pounds  corn 
silage,  3.11  pounds  corn  fodder,  and  0.31  pound 
hay 

3  59  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  23.99  pounds  corn 
silage.  4.22  pounds  corn-and-cob  meal 

7.61  pounds  boiled  cotton  seed,  22.42  pounds  corn 
silage,  0.40  pound  hay 

5.64  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  37.79  pounds  corn 
silage,  0,32  pint  molasses 

PENNSYLVANIA  STATION    EXPEEIMENTS.  (6) 

Western  steers. 

3.95  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  6.27  pounds  corn 
fodder.  9.85  pounds  corn  meal 

6.15  pounds  corn  fodder,  15  pounds  corn  meal 

4.12  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  3.50  pounds  corn 
fodder,  10.37  pounds  corn  meal 

3.50  pounds  corn  fodder,  18  pounds  corn  meal 

4.12  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  8  pounds  hay,  10.37 
pounds  corn  meal 

8  pounds  hay,  18  pounds  corn  meal 

Pennsylvania  steers. 

4  pounds  cotton-seedmeal,  8.5pouuds  corn  fodder, 
8  pounds  corn  meal 

5  pounds  corn  fodder,  15.65  pounds  corn  meal 


2  and 3  year  old  steers  (2  of  each). 

3  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  3.88  pounds  corn  fod- 
der, 6  pounds  corn  meal 

2.12  pounds  corn  fodder,  12  pounds  corn  meal 

3  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  10  pounds  hay,  6 
pounds  corn  meal '. 

9.77  pounds  hay,  12  pounds  corn  meal 


Days. 
79 

79 


83$ 
83£ 
83J 
83£ 
83i 


Num- 
ber of 
ani- 
mals. 


Average 

live 

Total 

weight 

daily 

of 

ration. 

animals. 

Pounds. 

Pounds. 

774 

27.97 

Average 
daily 

gain  in 
live 

weight. 


Pounds. 
2.81 


625 
619 
633 
586 
604 


885 
833 
909 

874 
774 


1,214 
1.214 


1,225   17.99 
1,205   21.50 


1,342 
1,327 


1,035 
961 


955 
989 


1,020 
1,  055 


22.49 
26 


20.50 
20.65 


12.88 
14.  12 


19 
21.77 


15.45 
16.37 
30.40 
14.83 
18.41 


25.63 
26.05 
26.  41 

20.57 
31.  80 
30.43 
43.75 


20.07 
21.15 


Cost  of 
food  per 

pound 
of  gain. 


2.29 
2.39 
2.72 

1.79 
1.82 
1.82 
2.22 


1.94 
1.35 


1.43 
1.98 


2.02 
2.26 


1.55 
1.04 


1.74 

1.78 


2.05 
1.47 


Cents. 
2.67 


2.  21  3.  29 

2.26  3.23 

2.  28  3.  41 

2.  07  2. 90 

1.  89  4.  68 


4.09 
4.13 

3.89 

2  55 
4.60 
2.70 
4.47 


12.50 
17.77 


14.60 
12.51 


11.66 
12.08 


14.61 
24.84 


6.20 
6.20 


7.20 
10.85 


a  Texas  Sta.  Buls.  6, 10,  and  27. 

b  Pennsylvania  Sta.  Buls.  6, 10,  and  12,  old  ser. 


396 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


-Results  of  feeding  cotton-seed  products  for  beef  production — Continued. 


Eation. 


MARVLAND  STATION  EXPERIMENTS,  (a) 

S-y  ear-old  giade  Shorthorns. 

2.50  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  12.20  pounds  corn 
(odder,  9.36  pounds  corn-and-cob  meal  and 
0.50  pint  molasses,  1.25  pounds  corn  meal,  9.33 
pounds  roots 

11.50  pounds  corn  fodder,  10.00  pounds  corn-and- 
cob meal  and  0.27  pint  molasses,  9.33  pounds 
roots  

ALABAMA  STATION  EXPERIMENTS.  (6) 

10  to  12  year  old  work  oxen. 

7.17  pounds  raw  cotton  seed,  20.64  pounds  bay 
with  some  cotton-seed  bulls  mixed  with  it 

3.71  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  24.94  pounds  bay 
with  some  cotton-seed  bulls  mixed  with  it 

3  to  4  year  old  steers. 

21.45  pounds  bay,  3.26  pounds  corn  meal 

ARKANSAS  STATION  EXPERIMENTS,  (c) 

2  to  2 J  year  old  steers. 

3.40  pounds  raw  cotton  seed,  14.48  pounds  cowpea- 
vine  hay 

3.44  pounds  raw  cotton  seed,  11.35  pounds  cotton- 
seed bulls,  8.07  pounds  cowpea-vine  hay 

4.55  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  14.79  pounds  cotton- 
seed hulls,  10.44  pounds  cowpea-vine  hay 


Dura- 

tion of 

Num- 

period 

ber  of 

of  ex- 

ani- 

peri- 

mals. 

ment. 

Days. 

90 

4 

90 

4 

105 

1 

105 

1 

105 

1 

90 

2 

90 

2 

90 

2. 

Average 

live 
weight, 

o? 
animals. 


Total 

daily 
ration. 


Pounds.  Pounds. 
1,  113       35.14 


1,062  |     32 


1,328  j  27.81 
1,422  i  28.65 


990   24.71 


718 
798 
831 


17.88 
21.86 
29.78 


Average 
daily 
gain  in 

live 
weight, 


Pounds. 

2.78 


1.70 


.22 
1.83 


Cost  of 
food  per 

pound 
of  gain. 


1.92 
1.95 
2.45 


Cints. 
7.05 


8.59 


54.29 
7.56 


4.99 
3.27 
4.68 


aMaryland  Sta.  Bui.  22.      b  Alabama  Canebrake  Sta.  Bui.  8.      c  Arkansas  Sta  Ept.  1890,  p.  134. 
II. — Results  of  feeding  cotton  products. 


Ration. 


MISSOURI  STATION  EXPERIMENTS,  (a) 

2-year-old  Shorthorn  steers. 

1.36  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  2.66 
pounds  wheat  bran,  2.32  pounds 
hay,  53.2  pounds  silage,  0.09  pound 
straw 

1.36  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  2.66 
pounds  wheat  bran,  4  pounds  hay, 
2  pounds  straw,  12.68  pounds  cofn 
fodder , 


MASSACHUSETTS    STATE    STATION  EX- 
PERIMENTS. (6) 

2-year-old  grade  Shorthorns. 

3.22  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  3.22 
pounds  wheat  bran,  7.49  pounds 
hay,  7.07  pounds  silage,  15  pounds 
roots,  1.07  pounds  barley  straw, 
4.04  pounds  clover  and  bay,  1.48 

pounds  barley  meal 

a  Missouri  Sta.  Bui.  8. 


D"ra-!S™f 

ti0»f    ani 
Perl0d-  mals. 


Days. 
49 


153 


Aver- 
age 
weight 
of  ani 

mals. 


Digest- 
ible 
organic 
matter 
in  daily 
ration. 


Pounds.  Pounds. 
991 


Aver- 
Nutri- 

tive       daily 
ratio  of  gain  in 
ration,  i     live 
weight 


Digest- 

pound 
of  gain. 


985 


Pounds  Pounds.    Cents. 
1.49 


2  I     1,106    1:4.14         1.67 

6  Massachusetts  State  Sta.  Kpt .  1892,  p.  92. 


13.60 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS. 


397 


II. — Results  of  feeding  cotton  products — Continued. 


Nnm- 


Ration. 


MASSACHUSETTS    STATE   STATION   EX- 
PERIMENTS (a)— continued. 

1-year-old  grade  Shorthorns. 

2.57  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  2.86 
pounds  wheat  bran,  6.06  pounds 
hay,  4.74  pounds  silage.  5.71  pounds 
loots,  0.64  pound  barley  straw,  3.19 
pounds  mixed  fodder 


MAINE  STATION  EXPERIMENTS.  (6) 

1  and  2  year  old  steers. 

1.75  pound--  cotton-seed  meal,    1.75 
pounds  corn  meal,  14  pounds  oat  j 
straw 

3.5  pounds  corn  meal,  14  pounds  hay. 

VIRGINIA  STATION  EXPERIMENTS,  (c) 

3\-year-old  steers. 

6  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  6  pounds 

wheat  bran,  10.28  pounds  hay 

6  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  6  pounds 

corn  meal.  9.07  pounds  bay 

4  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  6  pounds 

corn  meal,  15  pounds  roots 

6  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  6  pounds 

wheat  bran,  7.43  pounds  hay,   10 

pounds  silage 

12  pounds   coin  meal,   6.21   pounds 

hay,  10  pounds  silage 

6  pounds  corn  meal,  6  pounds  wheat 

bran,  9  pounds  hay 


Days. 

188 


132 
132 


PENNSYLVANIA  STATION  EXPERI- 
MENTS, (d) 

2-year-old  steers. 

3  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  7  pounds 
corn  meal,  4.36  pounds  hay,  1.20 
pounds  corn  fodder 

12  pounds  corn  meal,  4.36  pounds 
hay,  1.12  pounds  coru  fodder 


3-year-dd  steers. 

4.50  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  10.50 
pounds  corn  meal,  6.48  pounds  hay, 
1.52  pounds  corn  fodder 

17  pounds  corn  meal,  6.48  pounds 
hay,  1.58  pounds  corn  fodder 


4-year-old  steers. 

18  pounds  corn  meal,  7.27  pounds 
hay,  1.65  pounds  corn  fodder 

4.80  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  11.19 
pounds  corn  meal.  7.27  pounds  hay, 
1.72  pounds  corn  fodder 


2  and  3  year  old  grade  Shorthorn 
steers. 
First  period : 

2.90   pounds    cottonseed    meal, 
6.09    pounds    corn    meal,    6.60 

pounds  corn  fodder* 

11.73    pounds    corn    meal,  5.11 
pounds  corn  fodder 


Digest- 
ible   '  Nutri- 
ber  of !     "f> ;V  I  organic!    tive 
11    matter  |  ratio  of 
in  daily  ration, 
ration. 


Aver 
Dura- 
tion of 


28 


ounds. 
747 


835 

808 


1,172 

1,273 

1,277 
m 
1,327 

1,233 

1,253 


771 

782 


1,256 
1,270 


1,384 
1,335 


925 

883 


Pounds. 


1:  3.76 


Aver- 
age 
daily 

gain  in 
live 

weight. 


Pounds 
1.22 


1:  8.44  .90 

1:11.82         1.08 


1 

3.45 

1 

3.65 

1 

4.30 

1 

3.85 

1 

9.10 

1 

7 

10.20   1:  5 
11.89   1:  9.90 


15.10   1:  5.10 
17.05    1:10 


18.30    1:  9.30 


Digest-  ■ 

ible.     Cost  of 
organic  °S     . 

matter  I    1      l 

eaten  ' 

P  r 

pound 

of  gain. 


pound 
of  gain! 


Pounds.    Cents. 
12.67 


2.11 
1.85 


1.88 
1.85 


16.76   1:  5.30         1.14 


1:13.50         1.06 


9.57 

8.28 


4.83 
6.42 


8.03 
9.21 


9.70 
12.60 


27.20 
19.20 
19.20 

18.80 
9.20 
22.40 


7.80 
10.10 


12.90 
14.50 


8. 71         13. 80 
14.  70  1      23.  30 


12.07 
11.12 


a  Massachusetts  State  Sta.  Rpt.  1892,  p.  92. 
b  Maine  Sta.  Rpt.  1886,  p.  73. 


c  Virginia  Sta.  Bui.  3. 

d  Pennsylvania  Sta.  Bui.  10 ;  Rpt.  1886,  p.  228. 


398 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


II. — Results  of  feeding  cotton  prod  acts — Continued. 


Ration. 


PENNSYLVANIA  STATION  EXPERI- 
MENTS (a)— continued. 

2  and  3  year  old  grade  Shorthorn 
steers — Continued. 

Second  period: 

2.63  pounds  cotton-seed  meal, 
5.27  pounds  coru  meal,  8.86 
pounds  hay 

10.46  pounds  corn  meal,  7.97 
pounds  hay 


MAINE   STATION  EXPERIMENTS.  (6) 

5  to  8  months  old  Hereford,  Shorthorn, 
and  HoUtein  steers  (1  of  each  in 
each  experiment) . 

1.16  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  1.16 
pounds  wheat  bran,  9.65  pounds 
hay,  8.02  pounds  silage,  1.16  pounds 
ground  oats 

1.16  pounds  corn  meal,  1.16  pounds 
wheat  bran,  9.63  pounds  hay,  7.85 
pounds  silage,  1.16  pounds  ground 
oats 


18-month-old  steers. 

3.50  pounds  corn  meal,  12  pounds  hay. 
1.50    pounds    cotton-seed    meal,    2 

pounds  corn  meal,  12  pounds  hay. . 
3.50  pounds  corn  meal,  12  pounds  hay. 
2  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  5  pounds 

corn  meal,  10  pounds  hay 

2  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  3  pounds 

corn  meal,  12  pounds  oat  straw 


Dura- 
tion of 
period. 


Days. 
31j 

29J 


Num- 
ber of 
ani- 
mals. 


233 


weight 
of  ani- 
mals. 


Digest 

ible 

organic 

matter 
in  daily 

ration. 


Pounds.  Pounds 
979 


932 


582 


803 
908 


839 
781 


7.70 


7.73 


7.90 

8.04 


9.64 
8.18 


Digest- 
ible 

Aver 

Nutri- 

age 

organic 

tive 

daily 

matter 

ratio  of 

gam  in 

eaten 

ration. 

live 

per 

weight. 

pound 
of  gain. 

Pounds. 

Pounds. 

1:  6.30 

1.23 

1:10.80 

1.24 

1:  6.70 

1.65 

4.66 

1:10 

1.64 

4.70 

1:13.10 

.61 

13.18 

1:  7 

1.15 

6.87 

1:13.10 

.11 

73.10 

1:  6.20 

1.80 

5.35 

1:  6.80 

1.08 

7.57 

Cost  of 
food 
per 

pound 
of  gain. 


Gents. 

10.53 


11.51 


8.98 
9.38 


7.53 
7.41 


a  Pennsylvania  Sta.  Bui.  10;  Rpt.  1886,  p.  228.  b  Maine  Sta.  Rpts.  1887,  p.  89;  1890,  p.  71. 

III. — Prices  per  ton  of  the  feeding  stuffs  used  in  the  above  experiments. 


Stations. 

Feeding  stuffs. 

Maine. 

Massa- 
chusetts. 

Maryland. 

Pennsyl- 
vania. 

Texas. 

Virginia. 

a$14. 28 

I 

($22.  50 
\  24.  00 

\ 

$18.  50 
2.50 

($27.  20 
I  30.00 
1  26.00 
[  18.  00 
5.00 

$20. 00 

/ 

$12.  00 

1 

Cotton  seed : 

7.00 

9.00 

10.00 

20.00 

3.00 

Boiled 

/30. 00 
\26.  00 

}      27. 50 

29.50 

25.00 

30.00 
23.50 

}      15. 00 

5.00 

2.75 
7.00 

20.00 

f  14.  00 

\10.  00 

6.00 

15.00 

rio.  oo 

\13.00 

|        6.00 

10.00 

2.00 

2.50 

3.00 

5.00 

a  Porty  cents  per  bushel. 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS.    399 

Exclusive  cotton-seed  hull  and  meal  feeding. — The  practice  of  fattening 
steers  on  a  diet  made  up  exclusively  of  cotton-seed  hulls  and  meal  com- 
menced about  1883.  The  business  has  so  grown  that  it  is  estimated1 
that  400,000  cattle  were  probably  fattened  at  and  in  the  vicinity  of  the 
oil  mills  of  the  South  in  the  season  of  1893-94,  besides  large  numbers 
of  sheep.  It  is  also  likely  that  100,000  to  150,000  milch  cows  were  fed 
on  rations  made  up  quite  largely  of  cotton-seed  hulls  and  cotton-seed 
meal.  The  ration  for  fattening  cattle  is  3  or  4  pounds  of  meal  at  first, 
which  is  gradually  increased  to  6,  8,  and  even  10  pounds  per  head  per 
day,  and  all  the  hulls  they  will  eat.  The  proportions  vary  from  2  to  6 
pounds  of  hulls  to  1  of  meal.  Probably  the  ration  at  present  most  com- 
mon is  4  pounds  of  hulls  to  1  of  meal.  The  feeding  is  continued  from 
90  to  120  days. 

Emery,2  at  the  North  Carolina  Station,  fed  eight  native  and  grade  Short- 
horn steers,  loose  and  tied  up  in  stalls,  on  rations  of  cotton-seed  hulls  and 
meal  (3  to  5.6  of  hulls  to  1  of  meal)  with  fair  gains  and  the  production  of 
beef  of  good  quality.  There  was  little  difference  in  feeding  steers  loose 
and  tied  up,  but  natives  paid  better  than  grades,  and  2-year-olds  better 
than  3-year-olds.  Chamberlain,3  at  the  same  station,  fed  three  old  steers 
G  pounds  of  cotton-seed  meal  and  18  to  20  pounds  of  hulls  per  head 
per  day  in  the  months  of  May  and  June  without  injury  to  health.  In 
cold  weather  the  same  author4  fattened  four  2-year-old  steers  on  hulls 
and  meal  (4  to  1)  with  good  and  profitable  gains,  though  the  diges- 
tion of  the  animals  appeared  to  be  somewhat  impaired  after  84  days' 
feeding.  He  calculated  this  ration,  4  of  hulls  to  1  of  meal,  to  have 
a  nutritive  ratio  of  1:5.12,  while  actual  digestion5  of  the  ration  gives 
1 : 7.55. 

A  3-year-old  steer  and  a  heifer6  gained  an  average  of  2.09  pounds  per 
day  in  81  days'  feeding  at  the  North  Carolina  Station  on  a  ration  of  4.3 
pounds  of  hulls  to  1  of  meal;  and  2  steers6  gained  2.24  pounds  per 
head  daily  on  3.3  pounds  of  hulls  to  1  of  meal  during  41  days'  feeding 
in  cold  weather.  The  cost  of  food  per  pound  of  gain  was  4.00  and  4.50 
cents,  respectively.  A  single  steer7  made  a  gain  of  2.39  pounds  per 
day  in  59  days'  feeding  on  a  ration  of  2.2  pounds  of  hulls  to  1  of  meal 
in  hot  weather  without  injury  to  health  and  at  a  cost  of  3.71  cents  per 
pound  for  food.  This  latter  ration  had  a  nutritive  ratio  of  1 :  4.07.  The 
heaviest  feeding  of  cotton-seed  hulls  and  meal  anywhere  reported  has 
been  done  at  the  North  Carolina  Station,8  where  two  mature  steers 
averaging  1,065  pounds  live  weight  were  fed  an  average  of  16.4  pounds 


1  D.  A.  Tompkins  in  Manufacturers'  Record,  1894,  p.  257. 

2  North  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  93. 

3 North  Carolina  Sta.  Rpt.  1889,  p.  117. 

4  North  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  81. 

5  North  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  87d. 

6  North  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  81,  p.  11. 

7  North  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  81,  p.  21. 

8  North  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  111. 


400 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


of  cotton-seed  hulls  and  8.7  pounds  of*  meal  per  day  for  90  days  (practi- 
cally 2  of  hulls  to  1  of  meal,  with  a  nutritive  ratio  of  1 :3.72);  and  two 
2^  to  3£  year  old  steers  weighing  1,000  pounds  ate  an  average  of  13.5 
pounds  of  hulls  and  9.1  pounds  of  meal  per  day  for  142  days  (1£  of 
hulls  to  1  of  meal,  with  a  nutritive  ratio  of  1:3.29).  These  animals 
were  considered  fat  for  the  Raleigh  market  when  the  feeding  com- 
menced, and  yet  they  gained  an  average  of  1.7  pounds  per  head  daily 
for  the  entire  period  on  the  two  rations,  ate  the  rations  with  relish, 
remained  in  good  health,  and  produced  beef  of  excellent  quality,  as 
compared  with  the  average  of  the  season.  This  was  not  profitable f 
feeding,  though  paying  gains  were  made  for  40  to  00  days.  The  feed- 
ing was  continued  beyond  this  for  observation  of  the  effect  of  the 
heavy  feeding  and  for  other  purposes. 

The  Texas  Station l  fed  rations  of  3  and  2.6  pounds  of  hulls  to  1  of 
meal  in  long  periods  with  better  gains  than  on  any  other  rations.  The 
Alabama  Station2  fed  4  to  4.0  pounds  of  hulls  to  1  of  meal  to  old  (8  to 
18  years)  and  young  steers,  with  good  gains  in  all  cases,  but  the  only 
profitable  gains  were  with  young  animals. 

At  the  Arkansas  Station3  a  ration  of  3.3  pounds  of  hulls  to  1  of  meal 
produced  faster  and  cheaper  gains  than  any  other  combinations  of  feed- 
ing stuffs,  and  beef  of  as  good  quality. 

The  data  relating  to  the  foregoing  experiments  with  exclusive  feeding 
of  cotton-seed  meal  and  hulls  are  shown  in  the  following  table,  the 
digestible  matter4  in  the  rations  being  calculated  by  using  the  coeffi- 
cients for  rations  of  hulls  and  meal  nearest  to  their  proportions: 

Exclusive  cotton-seed  hull  and  cotton-seed  meal  feeding  for  beef  production. 


Ration. 


Dura 
tion  of 
period 


NORTH     CAROLINA    STATION     EXPERI- 
MENTS. 

2  and  3  year  old  native   and  grade 
Shorthorn  steers,  (a) 

Fed  loose  in  .stalls  on  17.97  pounds 
cotton-seed  hulls,  4.23  pounds  cot- 
ton-seed meal 

Fed  tied  up  18.05  pounds  cotton- 
seed bulls,  4.14  pounds  cotton-seed 
meal 

Grade  steers  used  in  No.  1. 

19.73  pounds  cotton-seed  hulls,  4.34 
pounds  cotton-seed  meal 


Days. 
100 


Num- 
ber of 
ani- 
mals. 


Aver- 
age 
weight 
of  ani- 
mals. 


Pounds 
896 


Digest- 

Digest- 

Aver- 

ible 

ible    1  Nutri- 

age 

organic 

organic     five 

daily 

matter 

matter   ratio  of 

gain  in 

eaten 

in  daily!  ration. 

live 

per 

ration. 

■weight. 

pound 

of  gain. 

Pounds. 

Pounds. 

Pounds. 

9.86 

1:8.34 

1.85 

5.33 

9.63 

1:8.47 

1.73 

5.  50 

11.24 

1:8.41 

1.70 

6.61 

Cost  of 

food 

per 

pound 

of  aain. 


Cents. 
b:i.4S 


aNorth  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  93. 

6  Cotton-seed  meal  valued  at  $24  and  cotton-seed  hulls  at .' 


',.50  per  ton. 


1  Texas  Sta.  Buls.  6  and  10. 

2  Alabama  Canebrake  Sta.  Buls.  8  and  15. 

3  Arkansas  Sta.  Rpt.  1890,  p.  134. 

-•Nortb  Carolina  Sta.  Buls.  87rf,  97,  and  118. 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS. 


401 


Exclusive  cotton-seed  hull  and  cotton-seed  meal  feeding  for  beef  production — Continued. 


Ration. 

Dura- 
lion  of 
period. 

Num- 
ber of 
ani- 
mals. 

Aver- 
age 
weight 
of  ani- 
mals. 

Digest- 
ible 
organic 

matter 
in  daily 

ration. 

Nutri- 
tive 
ratio  of 
ration. 

Aver- 
age 
daily 
gain  in 

live 
weight. 

Digest- 
ible 
organic 
matter 
eaten 
per 
pound 
of  gain. 

Cost  of 

food 

per 
pound 
of  gain. 

NORTH  CAROLINA  STATION  EXPERI- 
MENTS— continued. 

Native  steers  used  in  No.  1. 

16.59  pounds  cottonseed  hulls,  3.48 
pounds  cottonseed  meal 

Days. 
10U 

4 

Pounds. 
818 

Pounds. 
9.43 

1 : 8.  35 

Pounds. 
1.93 

Pounds 
4.90 

Cents. 

a  3.  32 

3  year-old  steers  used  in  No.  1. 

18  98  pounds  cotton  seed  hulls,  4.14 
pounds  cotton-seed  meal   

100 

4 

942 

10.74 

1:8.54 

1.72 

6.24 

a  4.  25 

2-year-old  steers  used  in  No.  1. 

17.34  pounds   cotton-seed  hulls,  3.97 

100 

4 

855 

9.93 

1:8.28 

1.91 

5.20. 

a  3.  27 

2-year-old  steers,  {b) 

17.94  pounds  cotton-seed  hulls,  4.56 
pounds  cotton-seed  meal 

84 

4 

934 

10.74 

1:7.55 

1.77 

6.07 

c4.90 

3-year-old  steer  and  heifer. 

17.23  pounds  cottonseed  hulls,  5.27 
pounds  cotton-seed  meal 

81 

2 

801 

11.06 

1:5.89 

2.09 

5.29 

a  4.  06 

Steers  in  Malls. 

24.88  pounds  cottonseed  hulls,  5.85 
pounds  cotton-seed  meal 

41 

o 

1,  236 

14.67 

1:7.52 

2.24 

6.55 

a  4.  50 

Steer  in  stall. 

13.10  pounds  cotton-seed  hulls,  6.03 
pounds  cottonseed  meal 

59 

1 

950 

9.46  ,  1:4.07 

2.39 

3.96 

a  3.  71 

Mature  steers,  (d) 

Fed  tied  up  16.44  pounds  cotton-seed 
hulls,  8.71  pounds  cotton-seed  meal . 

97 

2 

1,065 

12.40     1:3.72 

1.75 

7.  10 

c7.38 

-I  to  3i  year  old  steers. 

Fed  tied  up  13.45  pounds  cotton-seed 
hulls.  9.08  pounds  cotton-seed  meal. 

136 

2 

1,009 

11.36 

1:3.29 

1.71 

6.63 

c7.  98 

TEXAS  STATION  EXPERIMENTS. 

2  and  3  year  old  ijrade  Shorthorns,  (e) 

Fed  in  pen  17.38  pounds  cotton-seed 
hulls,  5.93  pounds  cotton-seed  meal. 

90 

4 

817 

1 

2.29 

/  3.  72 

3  and  4  year  old  Texas  steers,  (y) 

Fed  in  pen  16.38  pounds  cotton  seed 
hulls.  6.34 pounds  cotton-seed  meal. 

83 

6 

842 

11.09 

1:3.68 

2.43 

4.56 

/3.63 

ALABAMA  STATION  EXPERIMENTS. 

S-y ear-old  grade  Shorthorn,  (h) 

35.39  pounds  cotton-seed  hulls,  7.61 
pounds  cotton-seed  meal 

105 

1 

1.485 

2. 57 

t6.  39 

18-year-old  work  oxen,  (j) 

20.78  pounds  cotton-seed    hulls,  4.95 
pounds  cotton-seed  meal 

84 

2 

1,  150 

1.20 

?'8.  47 

2^-year-old  grade  Holstein  steers. 

18.47  pounds  cotton-seed  hulls,  4.50 
pounds  cotton-seed  meal 

84 

2 

751 

v2.82 

i'i.  25 

ARKANSAS  STATION  EXPERIMENTS. 

2  to  2%  year  old  steers,  (k) 

19.24  pounds  cotton-seed  hulls,  5.75 
pounds  cotton-seed  meal 

90 

2 

712 

2.74 

2.40 

a  Cotton  seed  meal  valued  at$24  and  cotton-seed 
bulls  at  $2.50  per  ton. 

b  North  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  81 . 

c(,'otton-seed  meal  valued  at  $24  and  cotton  seed 
hulls  at  $3.  50  per  ton. 

dNorth  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  118. 

eTexas  Sta.  Bui.  10. 

/Cotton-seed  meal  valued  at  $20  and  col  ton-seed 
hulls  at  $3  per  ton. 


g  Texas  Sta.  Bui.  6. 
h  Alabama  Canebrake  Sta.  Bui.  8. 
i  Cotton  seed  meal  valued  at  $20.90  and  cotton- 
seed hulls  $5  per  ton. 
j  Alabama  Canebrake  Sta.  Bui.  15. 
k  Arkansas  Sta.  Rpt.  1890,  p.  135. 


1993— No.  33- 


-26 


402 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


Exclusive  cottonseed  meal  and  corn-silage  rations  were  compared  at 
the  North  Carolina  Station1  with  exclusive  feeding  of  cotton-seed  meal 
and  hulls  with  the  result  that  silage  was  found  to  be  worth  about  $1 
per  ton  as  compared  with  hulls  at  $2.50.  Other  rations2  of  cottonseed 
meal  and  corn  and  sqja-bean  silage  produced  good  gains,  but  at  greater 
cost  than  hulls  and  meal  alone.  The  results  of  these  trials  of  cotton- 
seed meal  and  silage  are  summarized  below : 

Exclusive  cottonseed  meal  and  corn-silage  feeding  for  beef  production. 


Ration. 


Dura 

tionof 

period 


Nnm 
ber  of 


2  and  3  year-old  grade  Shorthorns. 

411.47  pounds  corn  silage,  5.51  pounds  j  Days  I 
cottonseed  meal(rt) 

Steers  in  stalls. 

50.83  pounds  corn  silage,  C.U9  pounds 
cotton  seed  nieal(c) 


Grade  Jersey  steers. 

41.25  pounds  corn  silage,  5.44  pounds 
cottonseed  meal 

39.70  pounds  soja-bean  silage,  5.50 
pounds  cotton-seed  meal 


32 

34i 


Aver 
age 
weight 
of  ani- 
mals. 


Pounds. 
852 


Digest 

ible 
organic 
matter 
in  daily 
ration. 


11.36 
9.98 


Digest 
I  Aver-       Lble 
Nutri-  j     age 
tive       daily     matter 
ratio  of  j  gain  in     eaten 
ration       live    j     per 

weight.!  pound    ot  £aln 
of  gain. i 


per 

pound 


Pounds.  Pounds.    Cents. 
&H.83 


1:4.70 
1:2.78 


2.54 

2.59 

2.55 

4.46 

1.61 

6.20 

4  5ii 
d9.02 


«Texas  Sta.  Bui.  10. 

b  Cot  ton -seed  meal  valued  at  $20  per  ton,  corn  silage  at  $2  per  ton. 

c North  Carolina  Sta.  Bills.  81  and  93. 

d Cotton-seed  meal  valued  at  $24  per  ton,  corn  silage  at  $5  per  ton,  and  soja  bean  silage  at  $4  per  ton. 


EUROPEAN   EXPERIMENTS. 

In  a  series  of  experiments3  made  under  the  direction  of  the  Halle 
Station  in  cooperation  with  farmers,  cotton-seed  meal  and  peanut  meal 
were  added  to  the  rations  of  fattening  oxen  and  sheep  to  increase  their 
richness  in  protein  beyond  the  normal  (Wolff)  ration.  The  animals 
fed  the  rations  richer  in  protein  produced,  as  a  rule,  faster  and  cheaper 
gains  than  the  ones  eating  the  rations  poorer  in  protein.  Marcker 
and  Morgen4  fed  15  young  steers,  averaging  1,100  pounds  in  live  weight, 
in  three  lots,  for  96  days  on  a  basal  ration  of  5.5  pounds  of  hay, 
3.74  pounds  of  chaff  and  straw,  2.2  pounds  of  wheat  bran,  44  pounds 
of  beet  diffusion  residue,  and  101.2  pounds  of  potato  residue  per  head 
daily,  to  which  1.6,  2.99,  and  4.38  pounds  of  cotton-seed  meal  and  4.29, 
3.41,  and  2.42  pounds  of  maize  were  added,  respectively.  The  nutri- 
tive ratios  of  these  rations  were  1 : 4.1,  1 : 3.6,  and  1 : 3.1.  The  average 
daily  gains  were  2.64,  2.81,  and  2.86  pounds.  The  gains  were  slightly 
in  favor  of  the  narrow  ratios,  and  the  financial  results  were  decidedly 

'North  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  81.  p.  21. 

2 North  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  93,  p.  41. 

3  Marcker  and  Morgen,  Deut.  landw.  Presse,  1893  (E.  S.  E.,  5,  p.  241). 

4E.  S.  E.,  3,  p.  572. 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS.    403 

so  on  account  of  the  increased  value  of  the  manure.  Bockenforde1 
compared  American  cotton-seed  meal  with  Erling's  fiber-free  meal  in 
different  quantities  in  the  rations  of  16  fattening  steers  during  two 
years.  He  concluded  that  the  animals  did  better  on  the  fiber-free 
meal. 

EFFECT  OF   COTTON-SEED   PRODUCTS   ON   BEEF   FATS. 

Harrington  and  Adriance2  found  the  kidney,  caul,  and  body  fats, 
respectively,  of  steers  fed  on  cotton-seed  meal  or  on  raw,  roasted,  and 
boiled  seed  to  have  melting  points  of  4.1°,  3.2°,  and  8.7°  C.  higher  than 
the  corresponding  fats  of  corn-fed  steers.  The  fats  of  steers  fed  on 
cotton- seed  products  gave  decided  reactions  with  silver  nitrate,  and  the 
iodin  numbers  were  somewhat  lower,  as  a  rule,  than  those  of  the  corn- 
fed  ones.  Bennett  and  Menke3  found  that  a  ration  of  cotton-seed  hulls 
and  meal,  with  or  without  raw  cotton  seed,  and  cowpea-vine  hay  pro- 
duced fats  with  melting  points  from  2°  to  4°  C.  higher  than  a  ration  of 
corn  meal  and  cowpea-vine  hay. 

FEEDING   COTTON-SEED   PRODUCTS   TO   SHEEP. 
ENGLISH  EXPERIMENTS. 

Experiments4  were  made  at  Woburn,  England,  with  sheep  at  pasture 
upon  4  acres  divided  into  four  1-acre  lots.  The  sheep  in  two  of  the 
lots  received  no  additional  food,  and  the  average  gain  made  was  taken 
as  that  due  to  pasturage  alone.  The  sheep  in  the  other  two  lots  received 
additional  foods,  as  shown  in  the  table  below,  and  the  increase  in  live 
weight  on  each  of  these  over  that  on  pasturage  alone  is  considered  as 
gain  due  to  the  additional  food.  This  assumes  that  the  pasturage  on 
the  different  acres  was  uniform,  which  is  an  element  of  uncertainty. 
The  results  are  summarized  by  years  in  the  following  table  (page  410). 

1  Landw.  Ann.  meckl.  pat.  Ver.,  40  (1884),  p.  317 ;  abs.  in  Jahresber.  Agr.  Cliem.,  8, 
p. 557. 

2  Texas  Sta.  Bui.  29. 

3  Arkansas  Sta.  Rpt.  1890,  p.  142. 

"Jour.  Royal  Agl.  Soc.  England,  2d  ser.,  vols.  14-20,  25,  pp.  243,  344, 143, 132.  314, 
230,  352,  353. 


404 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


fVoburn  experiments  with  sheep  at  pasture  with  and  without  additional  food*. 


Pasture. 


1877. 


Clover  ami  rye  grass 

Do 

A  verago  of  2  lots  of  10  each. 


1878. 

Clover  and  rye  grass 

Do 

Average  of  2  lots  of  10  and  5  each.< 


Clover  and  rye  grass 

Do 

Average  of  2  lots  of  10  each. 


1880. 

Clover  and  ryegrass 

Do 

Average  of  2  lots  of  10  and  5  each.-; 
1881. 


Dutch  clover  (a) 

Do 

Average  of  2  lots  of  10  each... 


1882. 

Dutch  clover  («) 

Do | 

Average  of  2  lots  of  10  and  6  eachJ 


Dutch  clover  (a) 

Do 

Average  of  2  lots  of  10  each. 


Dutch  clover  (a) 

Do 

Average  of  2  lots  of  10  each. 

Average 


Day*. 
105 
105 


119 
9 

119 
9 

119 
9 


110 
117 
104 


141 
18 

141 
18 

141 
18 


22 

004 


98 
110 
110 


Total  additional 
foods. 


Pounds. 

728 


0bp 

3*5 


Pounds.  Poun ds, 
303 

728  !  275 

211.75 


§5. 


728 


728 


728 


728 


447 
443.  50 

353.  50 


328 
435 
281. 


261.  75 
316.  25 
266.  50 


433. 75 
351.25 
150.  60 


344. 50 
401. 75 
156.  75 


266.  25 
210. 75 
141.75 


517 
416.  50 

428.  25 


>1S  i. 

>e  -.1. 

-  a  a 


Pounds.  Pounds. 
91.25  7.98 

63.25 


93.50 
90 


46.  25 
153.25 


—  4.  75 
49.75 


283 
200.  50 


187.  75 
245 


124.  50 
69 


88.75 
11.75 


a  White  clover  (Trifolium  repens). 

b  Not  including  experiments  of  1880  and  1883  on  cotton-seed  cake  and  maize  meal,  respectively. 

There  is  no  mention  of  noticeable  variation  during  the  first  and  sec- 
ond years — 1877  and  1878 — but  the  observation  is  made  "that  a  highly 
nitrogenous  food  like  decorticated  cotton -seed  cake  does  not  agree  with 
stock"  in  warm  weather,  and  that  maize  meal  appears  to  be  a  more 
suitable  food  for  fattening  in  summer.  In  1879  the  clover  on  plat  3  was 
better  (from  a  top  dressing  of  nitrate  of  soda  on  the  previous  crop)  than 
that  on  any  of  the  others,  and  the  low  gain  of  the  sheep  on  cotton-seed 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS. 


405 


cake  was  thought  to  be  due  to  unhealthy  condition  of  the  sheep;  while 
in  1880  the  clover  on  plat  4  was  by  far  the  strongest  and  best,  and  the 
sheep  on  it  made  a  larger  gain  than  either  those  receiving  no  addi- 
tional food  or  cotton-seed  cake,  and  nearly  as  large  as  those  receiving 
maize  meal.  During  1881  and  1882,  on  Dutch  clover  pasture,  the  sheep 
showed  most  excellent  gains  for  the  additional  foods,  but  the  variations 
in  weight  for  1883  are  ascribed  "in  great  measure  to  the  difference  in 
luxuriance  of  the  clover  crops,"  plats  1  and  2  having  been  injured  by 
the  previous  heavy  crop  of  barley,  with  which  the  clover  was  sown. 
The  sheep  having  maize  meal  for  additional  food  in  1884  did  not  show 
as  much  gain  as  sheep  on  pasturage  alone,  but  no  mention  is  made  of 
difference  in  quality  of  the  pastures. 

Experiments1  covering  the  winters  of  1885-86  and  188(5-87  were  made 
to  compare  the  effect  of  cereals  and  cotton  seed  and  linseed  cakes  when 
fed  as  additional  food  to  sheep  feeding  off  turnips  on  the  land.  In  both 
years  the  sheep  were  10  month-old  Hampshire-Oxfordshire  Downs. 
The  first  trial  lasted  10G  days  and  the  second  95  days.  The  first  winter 
the  basal  ration  was  0.328  pound  of  hay  chaff  and  20  pounds  of  ruta- 
bagas, and  the  second  winter  0.5  pound  of  hay  chaff  and  26.4  to  28.8 
pounds  of  rutabagas  per  head.  Each  lot  received  a  different  additional 
food.  The  sheep  were  fed  in  pens,  each  lot  in  a  pen  by  itself.  The 
results  were  as  follows : 

Comparative  value  of  cereals  and  cotton-seed  and  linseed  cakes  as  additional  food  for  sheep. 


Ration. 

Num- 
ber of 
sheep 
in  lot. 

Average 

live 

weight 

of  sheep 

Digest 

ible 
organic- 
matter 
in  daily 
ration. 

Nutri- 
tive 

ratio  of 
ration. 

1  :  6.  78 

1:  6.99 
1:  9  20 

1:10.01 

1:  7.74 

1:  8.18 
1:11.90 

1:  6 

1:  9.69 

1:  8.05 

Average 

daily 
gain  in 
weight. 

Digest- 
ible 
organic 
matter 
eaten 
per 
pound 
of  gain. 

Cost  of 
addi- 
tional 

food  (d) 

per 
pound 
of  gain. 

Experiments,  1885-86: 

Lot  1,  0.672  pound  linseed  cake 

Lot  2,  0.336  pound  linseed  cake    and 
0.336    pound  undecorticated  cotton  - 

• 

8 
6 

7 

6 

8 
8 

8 

8 

8 

Pounds. 
140 

135 
140 

133 

130 

173 
171 

175 

168 

168 

Pounds. 
2.41 

2.34 
2.45 

2.39 

2.42 

3.38 
3.33 

3.31 

3.  18 

3.18 

Pound. 
0.48 

.39 
.49 

.39 

.39 

.35 
.33 

40 

27 

.20 

Pounds. 

5.02 

5.  93 
4.97 

6.12 

6.26 

9.67 
10.  24 

8.29 

11.83 

15  89 

Cents. 
2.  81 

2  79 

Lot  3,  0.672  pound  wheat  or  wheat  meal. 
Lot  4,  0.336  pound  crushed  oats   aud 

2.02 
2.81 

Lot  5,  0.336  pound  crushed  oats  and 

3.35 

Experiments,  1886-87: 

Lot],  0.687  pound  linseed  cake 

Lot3|  0.687  pound  wheat  or  wheat  meal. 
Lot3, 0.687  pound  decorticated  cotton 

3.72 
3.23 

2.69 

Lot  4,  0.343  pound  linseed  cake  and 

3.96 

Lot5,  0.344 pound  barley  meal  and  0.343 
pound  decorticated  cotton  seed  cake . 

4.73 

a  Aside  from  hay  and  roots. 

The  winter  of  1885-86  was  an  unusually  severe  one,  and  sheep  died 
in  all  the  pens  except  where  oil  cake  was  fed.  The  deaths  were  not 
thought  to  be  due  to  the  additional  foods,  although  wheat  was  not  gen- 
erally considered  a  safe  food  for  sheep.     The  lot  on  wheat  made  the 


'Jour.  Roy.  Agl.  Soc.  England,  2d  ser.,  vols.  22  and  23,  pp.  514,  417. 


406  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

cheapest  and  best  gain.  The  lots  on  linseed  cake,  linseed  cake  and 
undecorticated  cotton-seed  cake  mixed,  and  oats  and  barley  were  equal 
in  point  of  cost,  but  of  the  three  lots  the  one  on  linseed  cake  gave  the 
largest  increase,  the  gains  of  the  other  two  lots  being  practically  the 
same  as  the  lot  on  oats  and  beans.  During  the  season  of  1 886-87  the  lot 
on  decorticated  cotton-seed  cake  made  the  best  gain  at  the  lowest  cost, 
those  on  linseed  cake  and  wheat  being  second  and  third  in  point  of 
ncrease  and  third  and  second  in  cost  of  increase,  respectively.  The 
cost  of  increase  would  of  course  change  with  the  market  values  of  tbe 
foods  and  when  their  mauurial  values  are  considered  the  difference  in 
favor  of  the  oil  cakes  increases.  Considering  the  manurial  values  of  the 
foods,  the  estimated  cost  of  additional  foods  for  1  pound  of  gain  during 
1886  was :  On  decorticated  cotton-seed  cake,  0.59  cent ;  on  linseed  cake, 
2.06  cents,  and  on  wheat,  2.38  cents. 

AMERICAN   EXPERIMENTS. 

Three  trials  in  as  many  years  were  made  at  the  New  York  Cornell 
Station  in  fattening  42  lambs  on  carbonaceous  rations,  made  up  largely 
of  corn  or  corn  meal,  as  compared  with  more  nitrogenous  rations  con- 
taining cotton-seed  meal  with  wheat  bran  or  linseed  meal,  or  both.1 
During  one  year  there  was  no  apparent  difference  in  results  due  to  the 
rations,  but  in  the  other  two  years  the  lambs  fed  the  more  nitrogenous 
rations  made  markedly  larger  gains  at  less  cost  and  on  less  digestible 
food  per  pound  of  gain  than  those  fed  on  the  carbonaceous  rations. 
The  meat  made  on  the  nitrogenous  rations  contained  a  greater  propor- 
tion of  lean  and  was  more  palatable  than  that  from  the  carbonaceous 
rations.  The  corn  meal  or  carbonaceous  rations  produced  weaker 
bones  and  from  46  to  72  per  cent  less  wool  than  the  nitrogenous  rations. 
Another  experiment2  at  the  New  York  Cornell  Station  with  lambs  has 
but  little  interest  here  beyond  showing  the  amount  of  cotton-seed  meal 
in  the  ration. 

Craig3  found  a  grain  mixture  of  1  part  of  linseed  meal  and  2  parts 
of  corn  meal  to  give  slightly  better  results  with  lambs  at  pasture  than 
a  like  amount  of  cotton-seed  meal  and  corn  meal.  Lindsey4  fed  sheep 
on  rations  having  nutritive  ratios  of  1:4.5  and  1 :5.5,  in  which  cotton- 
seed meal  was  a  part  of  the  grain  ration,  and  obtained  good  and  eco- 
nomical gains,  and  concluded  that  the  "constitutional  tendency  of  the 
animal,"  rather  than  the  ration,  "governed  the  amount  of  fat  and  flesh 
produced."  Four  lambs  and  four  sheep  were  fed  at  the  New  York 
State  Station5  in  four  lots  of  two  each  on  hay  and  a  grain  ration  of  whole 
corn  in  one  case  and  a  mixture  of  equal  bulks  of  wheat  bran  and  cotton- 
seed meal  in  the  other,  practically  the  same  amounts  of  hay  and  grain 

1  New  York  Cornell  Sta.  Buls.  2,  8,  and  47. 

2  New  York  Cornell  Sta.  Bui.  8. 

3  Wisconsin  Sta.  Bui.  32. 

4  Massachusetts  State  Sta.  Rpt.  1893,  p.  83. 

5  New  York  State  Sta.  Ept.  1888,  p.  300. 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS. 


407 


being  eaten  in  each  case.  The  sheep  eating  the  cotton-seed  meal  ration 
died  after  6  weeks'  feeding.  The  lambs  made  the  same  gains  in  132 
days  on  the  two  rations.  The  proportion  of  lean  meat  in  the  car- 
casses of  the  lambs  was  58.3  per  cent  for  those  fed  cotton-seed  meal 
and  33.1  per  cent  for  those  fed  whole  corn. 

Harrington  and  Adriance  '  found  the  mutton  suet  from  sheep  fed 
cotton  seed  meal  to  have  an  average  melting  point  4°  C.  and  an  iodiu 
number  7.8  higher  than  that  from  sheep  fed  corn  meal.  Whole  raw 
cotton  seed  is  fed  to  a  considerable  extent  to  sheep  in  the  Southern 
States. 

The  principal  data  obtained  in  the  experiments  with  sheep  at  the 
New  York  Cornell  and  Massachusetts  State  stations  are  summarized 
in  the  following  table: 

Feeding  cotton-seed  meal  in  combination  with  other  foods  to  sheep. 


Ration. 

Dura- 
tion of 
period. 

Num- 
ber of 
ani- 
mals. 

Average 
live 

weight. 

Digest- 
ible 
matter 
in  daily 
ration. 

Nutri- 
tive 
ratio  of 
ration. 

Average 
daily 
gain. 

Digest- 
ible 
organic 
matter 

per 
pound 
of  gain. 

Cost  of 

food 

per 

pound 

of  gain. 

NEW  YORK  CORNELL  STATION 
EXPERIMENTS,  (a) 

6-month  old  Cotswold   and   South- 
dovjn  lambs. 

0.21  pound  cottonseed  meal,   0.46 
pound  linseed  nieal,  0.291  pound 
wheat  bran,    1.205  pounds   hay, 

Days. 
166 

166 

3 
3 

Pounds. 
61 

54 

Pounds. 
1.22 

1.03 

1:  3.3 
1:  8.4 

Pound. 
0.184 

.104 

Pounds. 
6.62 

9.86 

Cents. 

0.6S4  pound  corn  or  corn  meal,  0.992 
pound  hay.  0.45  pound  roots 

b  13. 27 

fj-month-old  Shropshire  and  South- 
doivn  lambs. 

0.788  pound  corn  or  corn  meal,  0.754 
pound  hay,  0.735  pound  roots 

0.351  pound  cotton-seed  meal,  0.771 
pound  wheat  bran,  1.033  pounds 

151 
151 

151 

151 

2 
o 
2 

60 
67 

70 

69 

1.08 
1.21 

1.27 

1  16 

1:10.9 
1:  4.2 

1:  6.5 

1:  6.  3 

.161 
.256 

.248 

191 

6.69 

4.71 

5.12 

c7.59 

0.205  pound  cotton-seed  meal,  0.675 
pound  corn   or  corn  meal,  0.205 
pound  wheat  bran,  0.844  pound 
hay,  0.801  pound  roots 

0.205  pound  cotton-seed  meal,  0.089 
pound  corn  or  corn  meal,  0.205 
pound  wheat  bran,  0.775  pound 

c6.  36 
c7  82 

MASSACHUSETTS  STATE  STATION 
*  EXPERIMENTS,  {d) 

Two  lots  grade  Southdown  wethers. 

0.100  pound  cotton-seed  meal,  0.894 
pound  silage,  0.812  pound  Buffalo 
gluten  meal,  1.148  pounds  rowen. 

0.0.30  pound  cottonseed  meal,  1.381 
pounds  silage,  0.620  pound  Buf- 
falo gluten   meal,  1.307   pounds 

88 
88 

3 
3 

72 
77.8 

1.59 
1.474 

1:  4.5 
1:   5.  5 

.274 
.254 

5.79 
5.80 

e  7. 53 
el  42 

a  New  York  Cornell  Sta.  Buls.  2  and  8. 

b  Cost  per  ton  of  foods:  Cotton-seed  meal,  $23;   linseed  meal  $26;  corn  meal,  $26;  wheat  bran,  $18; 
hay,  $10. 
c  Cotton-seed  meal,  $22.50;  corn  meal,  $20;  wheat  bran,  $18;  hay,  $7.75;  roots,  Scents  per  bushel. 
d  Massachusetts  State  Sta.  Rpt.  1893,  p.  83. 
e  Cotton  -seed  meal,  $28;  silage,  $2.75;  Burlalo  gluten  meal,  $21;  rowen,  $15. 


Texas  Sta.  Bui.  29. 


408  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

EUROPEAN   EXPERIMENTS. 

Marcker  and  Morgen  '  fed  00  sheep  in  (5  lots  of  10  each.  With  a  con- 
stant basal  ration,  3  lots  were  fed  cottonseed  meal  and  wheat  bran 
in  varying-  proportions,  the  cotton-seed  meal  replacing  a  part  of  tlie 
wheat  bran  in  the  case  of  different  lots.  The  amounts  of  cotton-seed 
meal  fed  to  the  lots  of  10  lambs  were  1.43,  3.08,  and  4.G2  pounds, 
respectively,  and  of  wheat  bran  9.08,  7.48,  and  0.27  pounds  respec- 
tively. The  nutritive  ratios  of  the  rations  were  1:4.3,  1:3.6,  and 
1:3.2.  The  average  daily  gains  were  1.07, 1.94,  and  2.13  pounds  per  lot 
of  10  head.  Three  other  lots  of  10  sheep  each  were  fed  2.75,  2.31, 
and  1.87  pounds  of  cotton-seed  meal,  respectively,  and  1.10,  3.30,  and 
5.39  of  maize,  with  the  same  basal  ration.  The  nutritive  ratios  were 
1:4.2,  1  :4.0,  and  1:5,  and  the  gains  2.13,  2.02,  and  2.55,  respectively. 
The  greatest  gain  in  the  iirst  series  was  on  the  ration  having  the  nar- 
rowest nutritive  ratio  and  in  the  last  on  the  one  having  the  widest.  The 
feeding,  though  liberal,  was  at  a  financial  loss.  Garola2  reports  upon 
experiments  made  by  Vitalis,  where  250  grams  Egyptian  cotton-seed 
cake  and  300  grams  hay  fed  daily  to  milch  ewes  produced  40  per  cent 
more  milk  than  1,000  grams  of  the  same  hay  alone,  and  at  00  per  cent  of 
the  cost.  The  percentage  of  raw  wool  was  also  greater  where  the  oil 
cake  was  fed. 

FEUDING  COTTON  SEED  PRODUCTS  FOR  PORK  PRODUCTION. 

Considerable  interest  was  awakened  in  the  South  a  few  years  ago  as 
to  the  feeding  of  cotton  seed  to  hogs,  and  cotton  seed  has,  no  doubt, 
been  fed  to  hogs  by  some  farmers  with  success,  especially  after  allow- 
ing it  to  remain  piled  in  the  open  air  for  a  time  to  "  kill  "  the  seed  and 
soften  the  hard  seed  coat,  or  to  stand  in  shallow  water  for  a  number  of 
days  to  soften  the  hulls;  but  this  was  merely  supplementary  to  the 
range  and  not  for  rapid  fattening.  The  carefully  conducted  experi- 
ments noted  below  indicate,  as  a  rule,  that  cotton  products  are  posi- 
tively injurious  to  hogs  and  can  not  be  safely  used,  at  least  not  in  any 
quantity. 

In  two  years  Curtis3  fed  at  the  Texas  Station  35  pigs,  3.1  to  11 
months  old,  on  rations  containing  large  proportions  of  cotton-seed  meal, 
or  cotton  seed  either  roasted,  boiled,  or  soaked,  and  on  corn  alone. 
The  average  ration  per  pig  was  from  1  to  1.4  pounds  of  cotton-seed 
products.  The  corn-fed  pigs  all  did  well,  making  an  average  daily 
gain  of  1.3  to  1.(5  pounds;  but  those  receiving  cotton-seed  products 
could  not  be  induced  to  eat  enough  food  for  rapid  growth.  They 
gained  from  0.4  to  0.7  pound  per  day,  and  were  usually  taken  sick  in 

•Magd.  Ztg.,  1888,  Nos.  597   and  625;    a!>s.  in  .Takresber.  agr.  Ckeni.,  12  (1889), 
p.  Gil;  E.  S.  R.,  3,  p.  572. 
"  Abs.  in  Jour.  Am.  Chem.  Soc,  15  (1893),  p.  659. 
3  Texas  Sta.  Bui.  21. 


THE    FEEDING   VALUE    OF    COTTONSEED    PRODUCTS.  409 

six  (o  eight  weeks  after  the  feeding  began.  The  mortality  of  the  pigs 
receiving  cotton -seed  meal  was  87  per  cent,  roasted  seed  75  per  cent, 
and  boiled  seed  25  per  cent.  It  was  also  observed  that  the  pigs  escap. 
ing  sickness  and  death  for  thirty  days  beyond  the  time  when  sickness 
usually  set  in  were  safe  from  attack,  but  were  permanently  stunted  in 
growth.  Small  amounts  of  cotton  seed  meal  in  the  slops  are  stated  to 
have  caused  deaths  in  the  college  herd  of  swine  in  previous  years. 
Curtis  concludes  "  that  there  is  no  profit  whatever  in  feeding  cotton 
seed  in  any  form  or  cotton-seed  meal  to  hogs  of  any  age." 

lioberts,1  at  the  New  York  Cornell  Station,  endeavored  to  feed  a 
4-year-old  sow  2  pounds  of  cotton-seed  meal  along  with  4  pounds  of 
wheat  bran  and  2  pounds  of  corn  per  day.  She  was  finally  induced  to 
eat  one-half  pound  of  cotfou-seed  meal  per  day  for  143  days,  when  she 
was  slaughtered  and  gave  evidence  of  having  produced  a  greater  pro- 
portion of  lean  meat  than  fat.  The  nutritive  ratio  of  the  ration  was 
1 : 5.2. 

Experiments  at  the  Massachusetts  State  Station2  in  1883  failed  to 
prove  that  the  addition  of  cotton-seed  meal  or  wheat  bran  or  both  to 
corn  meal  made  a  more  valuable  food  for  pigs  than  corn  meal  alone. 
One  pig  in  the  experiment  eating  corn  meal  and  wheat  bran  died  of 
apoplexy.  At  the  Virginia  Station3  3  pigs  were  fed  a  ration  of  5 
parts  cotton-seed  meal,  2  parts  bran,  and  2  parts  beef  scrap,  giving  a 
nutritive  ratio  of  1 : 2.35.  All  died  within  eight  weeks  after  the  feeding 
commenced.  The  Kentucky  Station4  concluded  that  cotton-seed  meal 
could  not  be  fed  to  hogs  profitably  for  either  growth  or  fattening.  E. 
O.  Call5  (farmer)  fattened  20  hogs  on  boiled  cotton  seed,  and  stated  that 
he  had  never  seen  healthier  hogs.  Harrington  and  Adriance5  examined 
the  lard  made  from  these  hogs  and  found  it  to  have  an  average  melting 
point  of  9°  C.  higher  and  an  iodin  number  2  percent  less  than  lard  from 
corn-fed  hogs.  It  also  reduced  silver  nitrate  to  a  considerable  extent. 
Wheeler"  fed  18  pigs,  from  19  to  39  weeks  old,  on  a  mixture  of  1  part 
cotton-seed  meal,  G  of  wheat  midlings,  2  of  bran,  and  4  of  corn  during 
35  days,  and  a  mixture  of  1  part  cotton-seed  meal,  4  of  midlings,  2  of 
bran,  and  G  of  corn  during  a  second  35  days'  period,  with  fairly  good 
results. 

At  the  North  Carolina  Station '  a  mature  hog  was  fed  in  three  periods 
of  20  days  each  on  ^,  1^,  and  2  pounds  of  cotton-seed  meal  and  2.  2i, 
and  3  pounds  of  wheat  bran,  respectively,  with  skim  milk  and  green 
food.  The  hog  did  well  until  the  third  period,  when  it  refused  to  eat  so 
much  cotton-seed  meal,  became  sick,  and  lost  weight,,  but  recovered 


1  New  York  Cornell  Sta.  Bui.  5. 

2  Massachusetts  State  Sta.  Rpt.  1883,  p.  40. 

3  Virginia  Sta.  Bui.  10. 

4  Kentucky  Sta.  Bui.  19. 
6  Texas  Sta.  Bui.  29. 

6New  York  State  Sta.  Rpt.  1892,  p.  286. 
'North  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  109. 


410 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


on  the  substitution  of  corn  meal  for  cotton-seed  meal  in  the  ration. 
Another  hog,  similar  to  this  one  and  fed  the  same,  except  that  the  cot- 
ton seed  meal  was  replaced  by  equal  amounts  of  corn  meal,  remained 
healthy  and  gained  steadily. 

FEEDING    COTTON-SEED    PRODUCTS    TO    CALVES. 

In  an  experiment  at  the  Mississippi  Station,1  Irby  fed  21  calves,  in  7 
lots  of  3  each,  on  cotton-seed  products  in  comparison  with  corn  chop, 
wheat  bran,  and  skim  milk,  each  fed  alone.  Each  lot  contained  1  grade 
Holstein  and  2  grade  Jersey  calves.  The  trial  lasted  50  days.  The 
results  were  as  follows : 


Results  of  feeding  cotton  seed  and  cotton-seed  meal  to  calves. 
[Mississippi  Station.] 


Lots. 


Average  daily  ration. 


1.61  pounds  cotton-seed  meal  and  13.19 
pounds  skim  milk 

13.34  pounds  whole  milk 

2. 96  pounds  wheat  bran  and  12. 96 pounds 
skim  milk 

1.91  pounds  corn  chop 

25.04  pounds  skim  milk 

4.35  pounds  crushed  cotton  seed 

5.23  pounds  boiled  cotton  seed 


Average 

live 
weight 
at  begin- 
ning. 


Pounds. 
265 

155 

216 
215 
215 
209 
234 


Average 

daily 
gain  in 
weight. 


Pounds. 
1.20 
1.17 

.74 

.40 

1.57 

.85 
.67 


Organic 

matter 

in  ration. 


Pounds. 
2.55 
1.61 

3.59 
1.58 
2.28 
3.66 
2.26 


Digesti- 
ble 
organic 
matter 
in  ration. 


Pounds. 
2.26 
1.61 

2.70 
1.37 
2.28 
2.45 
1.30 


Nutri- 
tive 
ratio. 


1:  1.21 
1:   4.32 

1:  2.17 
1:11.72 
1:  1.30 
1:  4.92 


Cost  of 
food  per 
pound 
of  gain. 


Cents. 
6.8 
14.16 

12.7 
3.8 
7.98 
2.1 
3.25 


Good  and  profitable  gains  were  obtained  on  cotton-seed  products 
without  injury  to  the  health  of  the  animals,  the  cheapest  gains  being 
on  boiled  and  crushed  cotton  seed. 

At  the  Pennsylvania  Station  Hunt2  fed  3  calves,  2  months  old,  1 
pound  of  cotton-seed  meal  in  2  pounds  of  hot  water,  added  to  16  pounds 
of  skim  milk  per  day  and  per  head.  Two  of  the  calves  died  after  about 
1  month's  feeding.  Post-mortem  examination  of  one  of  these  showed 
the  lungs  and  pleime  to  be  inflamed.  The  third  calf,  as  well  as  6  others 
fed  similarly  except  as  to  cotton-seed  meal,  kept  in  good  health  and 
made  fair  gains. 

The  Arkansas  Station3  fed  calves  weighing  200  to  350  pounds  for  9 
weeks  on  cotton-seed  hulls  and  cotton-seed  meal  (proportion  not  stated) 
with  good  average  gains.  Two  calves,  2  to  3  weeks  old,  were  fed  1  to  6 
ounces  of  cottonseed  meal  in  0  to  16  pounds  of  skim  and  whole  milk 
per  head  and  day,  according  to  age,  at  the  North  Carolina  Station.4 
They  died  after  about  30  and  40  days'  feeding,  apparently  from  the 
toxic  effect  of  the  cotton-seed  meal,  which  powerfully  affected  the 
nervous  system.     Leitze5  investigated  several  cases  of  death  of  calves 

'Mississippi  Sta.  Bui.  8. 

2  Pennsylvania  Sta.  Bui.  17. 

3  Arkansas  Sta.  Rpt.  1889,  p.  82. 

4  North  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  109. 
6  Milch  Ztg.,  23  (1894),  p.  38. 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS.    411 

9  to  12  months  old  attributed  to  cotton-seed  meal.  These  calves  were 
fed  3  heaping  liters  (more  than  3  quarts)  of  cotton-seed  meal  daily  in 
addition  to  milk,  hay,  and  linseed  cake.  Symptoms  of  disease  were 
noticed  about  10  days  before  death.  The  autopsy  showed  hypertrophy 
of  the  heart  and  congestion  of  the  lower  lungs,  liver,  and  spleen. 
Veterinarian  Vallers  remarks,  with  reference  to  the  above,  that  cotton- 
seed meal  causes  a  yellowing  of  the  animal  body. 

Emmerling l  reports  on  feeding  12  calves,  4  to  0  months  old,  on  cotton- 
seed meal  and  milk.  Seven  died  after  3  weeks'  feeding.  The  lungs, 
intestines,  and  stomach  were  inflamed.  Another  instance  is  noted 
where  old  and  young  animals  ate  1  pound  of  cotton-seed  meal  per  day 
without  injury. 

FEEDING   COTTON-SEED   PRODUCTS    TO    HORSES   AND    MULES. 

But  little  definite  information  has  been  found  as  to  the  use  of  cotton 
products  as  food  for  horses  and  mules.  Favorable  statements  have 
appeared  in  the  agricultural  press  from  time  to  time,  but  little  or  no 
data  have  been  presented.  Baron  E.  d'Allinges,  agriculturist  of  the 
Biltmore  estate,  Biltmore,  N.  C,  writes  that  he  has  fed  working  horses 
and  mules  during  6  days  of  the  week  for  3  years  on  the  following 
ration :  Thirteen  to  15  pounds  of  cut  hay  and  corn  fodder,  4  pounds  of 
wheat  bran,  2  pounds  of  cotton-seed  meal,  and  0  pounds  of  corn  meal. 
On  Sundays  he  gives  whole  corn  and  oats  and  uncut  hay. 

At  the  North  Carolina  Station2  2  old  horses  were  fed  for  2  periods  of 
12  and  18  days  on  2  and  2£  pounds  of  cotton-seed  meal,  respectively, 
with  4  pounds  each  of  corn  meal  and  ship  stuff  and  clover  and  timothy 
hay.    The  animals  ate  the  rations  well  and  gained  weight. 

Gebek3  states  that  draft  horses  do  well  on  2  pounds  of  cotton-seed 
meal  daily  in  their  rations. 

COTTON-SEED    PRODUCTS   FOR   MILK   AND   BUTTER   PRODUCTION. 

AMERICAN  EXPERIMENTS. 

Lloyd4  found  in  2  years'  experiments  at  the  Mississippi  Station  that 
raw  cotton  seed  was  more  economical  for  milk  and  butter  production 
as  regards  quantity  than  steamed  or  roasted  seed  or  cotton-seed  meal, 
and  that  the  latter  was  much  cheaper  than  corn  meal.  The  butter  from 
raw  seed,  however,  was  sticky,  poor  in  flavor,  and  brought  less  for  the 
outlay  than  that  from  cows  fed  on  steamed  seed,  the  butter  in  the  latter 
case  being  much  superior  in  quality  to  any  of  the  rest.  A  third  year's 
test  and  a  summary  of  the  35  give  steamed  seed  as  a  better  and  cheaper 

1  Centbl.  ao-r.  Chem.,  1884,  p.  472. 

2  North  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  109. 

3  Landw.  Vers.  Sta.,  42,  p.  279. 

4  Mississippi  Sta.  Buls.  13  and  15. 
6  Mississippi  Sta.  Bui.  21. 


412 


THE    COTTON   PLANT. 


milk  and  butter  producing  food  than  either  raw  seed  or  meal,  butter  from 
tlie  latter  costing  nearly  twice  as  much  as  from  steamed  or  raw  seed. 
The  data  for  these  experiments  are  summarized  in  the  following  table: 

Feeding  cottonseed  products  for  milk  and  butter  production. 


Ration. 

Dura- 
tion 

of  pe- 
riod. 

Num- 
ber of 
ani- 
mals. 

A  verage 

daily 
mili< 
yield. 

Fat 

content 

of 

milk. 

Cost  of 
food 

per  gal- 
lon of 
milk. 

Average 
daily 
butter 

produc- 
tion. 

Cost  of 
food 

per 

pound 
of  but- 
ter. 

MISSISSIPPI  STATION  EXPERIMENTS. 

7  natives,   $  grade  Jerseys,    and    1   grade 
Devon,  (a) 

8.60  pounds  raw  cotton   seed,  9.38  pounds 

Days. 
84 

84 

84 

84 

84 

84 

35 
35 
35 
35 
35 
35 

35 
35 
35 
35 
35 
35 

10 
10 
10 

10 
10 
10 

5 

5 
5 
5 
5 
5 

5 
5 

5 
5 
5 
5 

Gallons. 
1.03 

.98 

1 .  37 

1.24 

1.  10 

1 .  04 

1.10 
1.  22 

.97 
1.47 

.91 
1.30 

1.09 

.97 
1.56 
1.30 
1.51 
1.51 

Percent. 

5.  62 
5.  55 
5.  64 
3.86 
5.  43 
5.  38 

5.  95 

5.84 
5.  87 
5.74 
5.70 

Vents. 
7.8 

7.5 

11.7 

11.5 

14.3 

12.9 

7.7 
8.5 
8.8 
12.8 
12.8 
12.3 

6.3 
8.3 
4.9 
8.4 
9.8 
12.6 

Pound. 

0.460 

.441 
.544 
.545 
.  386 
.364 

.498 
.  545 
.  439 
.  455  " 
.  396 
.  560 

.  522 
.  438 
.717 
.602 
.  .  680 
.685 

Cents. 
15  70 

9.82  pounds  raw  cotton  seed,  8.47  pounds 

15.62 

9.70  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  14.16  pounds 
9.92  pounds  cottonseed  meal,  12.09  pounds 

26.83 
23. 62 

12.18  pounds    Bermuda  hay,  9.90  pounds 

37.31 

9.80  pounds  mixed  hay,  9.66  pounds  corn 

33.  65 

4  grade  Jerseys  and  1  grade  Holstein.  (b) 
9.5   pounds  raw  cotton    seed,  9.2    pounds 

17.4 

10.6  pounds  roasted  cottonseed,  10.5  pounds 
10.4  pounds  boiled  cotton  seed,  8.5  pounds 

19.1 
19.6 

9.9  pounds  corn  meal,  9.9  pounds  Bermuda 
hay 

41.4  • 

9.5  pounds   raw   cotton   seed,   8.5   pounds 

29.5 

9.5  pounds  raw  cotton  seecl,  10.9  pounds 

28.5' 

4  grade  Jerseys  and  1  grade  Holstein.  (c) 

7.8  pounds  raw  cotton  seed,  7.7  pounds  Ber- 
muda hay,  10  pounds  silage 

8  pounds  raw  cotton  seed,  4.9  pounds  tim- 
othy hay,  9.8  pounds  silage 

9.9  pounds  boiled  cotton  seed,  7.5  pounds 

13.2 
18.4 
]0.9 

9.9  pounds  boiled  cotton  seed,  6.5  pounds 
8.8  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  10.2  pounds 

18.1 

8.8  pounds   cotton-seed   meal,   8.8  pounds 
timothy  hay,  9.9  pounds  silage 

28.1 

a  Bui.  13. — Cost  of  foods  per  ton  in  these  tests  :  Raw  cotton  seed,  $9;  cotton-seed  meal,  $20;  Bermuda 
hay,  $10;  mixed  hay,  $7;  corn  meal,  $20.85. 

b  Bui.  15. — Cost  of  foods  in  these  6  experiments  per  ton:  Raw  cotton  seed,  $6;  boiled  cotton  seed, 
$6.30;  roasted  cotton  seed,  $7.20;  cotton-seed  meal.  $20;  Bermuda  hay,  $12.50;  corn  meal.  $25;  timothy 
hay,  $20.80. 

c  Bui.  21. — Roasted  and  boiled  cotton  seed  and  cotton-seed  meal  were  same  prices  as  in  note  2;  Ber 
muda  hay,  $10;  timothy  hay,  $21.46;  and  silage,  $2  per  ton. 

Vanderford,1  at  the  Tennessee  Station,  found  it  more  economical  to 
purchase  and  add  cotton-seed  meal  and  wheat  bran  to  home-grown 
rations  than  to  feed  them  alone.  The  same  experimenter2  did  not  suc- 
ceed well  in  getting  cows  to  eat  a  ration  composed  entirely  of  cotton- 
seed hulls  and  cotton-seed  meal,  and  advises  the  use  of  15  pounds  of 


'Tennessee  Sta.  Bui.,  Vol.  V,  No.  3. 
*  Tennessee  Sta.  Bui.,  Vol.  VI,  No.  2. 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS.    413 

hulls  ami  5  pounds  of  cotton-seed  meal  per  1,000  pounds  live  weight  for 
milk,  aud  the  same  amount  of  hulls  and  3  pounds  meal  for  butter,  with 
other  foods  in  eaeh  ease. 

As  the  result  of  two  years'  experiments  at  the  Maine  Station  with  7 
cows,  Jordan1  found  that  "the  substitution  of  cottonseed  meal  for  an 
equal  quantity  of  corn  meal  unmistakably  increased  the  production  of 
milk  and  butter  to  a  profitable  extent/'  though  the  total  amount  of 
digestible  matter  in  the  two  rations  was  practically  the  same.  Curtis2 
observed  during  seven  years'  observations  and  experiments  that  eot- 
ton-seed meal  added  to  the  ration  increased  the  yield  of  milk  and  butter, 
and  kept  down  the  proportion  of  milk  to  butter.  The  best  results 
were  obtaiued  from  a  mixture  of  "ground  stuff"  and  cottonseed  meal, 
with  a  nutritive  ratio  of  about  1:4,  with  pasturage. 

Hunt,'' at  the  Pennsylvania  Station,  fed  G  pounds  of  cotton-seed  meal 
per  head  daily  to  cows  without  apparent  injury  to  health  and  by  substi- 
tuting equal  weights  of  cotton-seed  meal  for  wheat  bran  increased  the 
milk  yield  one-fifth  without  changing  the  quality  of  the  milk. 

Armsby 4  concludes  from  experiments  with  three  cows  that  "increas- 
ing the  proportion  of  protein  in  the  ration  by  substituting  cotton-seed 
meal  or  malt  sprouts  for  corn  meal  had  no  effect  upon  the  milk  pro- 
duction." 

Four  Jersey  cows  were  fed  at  the  New  York  State  Station 5  for  160 
days  on  coarse  foods  aud  a  grain  ration  in  one  case  of  corn  meal,  and  of 
cotton-seed  meal  in  the  other.  "The  feeding  of  cotton-seed  meal  was 
accompanied  by  an  iucreased  hay  consumption"  and  milk  yield,  which 
was  sufficiently  marked  to  indicate  that  cotton-seed  meal  had  decidedly 
affected  the  milk  yield,  while  corn  meal  seemed  to  have  had  but  little 
specific;  effect  on  yield. 

When  corn  meal  and  cotton-seed  meal  were  fed  in  like  amounts  in 
connection  with  a  basal  ration,  Whitcher6  found  a  slight  difference  in 
favor  of  the  cotton-seed  meal  for  milk  production.  The  grain  ration  of 
the  New  York  Cornell  Station7  dairy  herd  of  2D  cows  during  the  win- 
ter months  of  1892  was  8  pounds,  consisting  of  3  parts  of  wheat  bran, 

2  of  cotton-seed  meal,  and  Oof  corn  meal;  the  summer  grain  ration  was 

3  pounds  of  wheat  bran  and  1  of  cotton-seed  meal,  the  cows  being  at 
pasture  in  summer  and  eating  clover  hay,  silage,  and  roots  in  winter. 
On  these,  milk  was  produced  during  the  entire  year  for  an  average 
of  G2.o  cents  per  100  pounds  and  butter  for  15.8  cents  per  pound.  The 
grain  ration  used  by  the  Maine  Station8  in  a  two  years'  test  of  dairy 

'Maine  Sta.  Rpts.  1885-86,  p.  65,  and  1886-87,p.  84. 
2Texas  Sta.  Bui.  11. 
'Pennsylvania  Sta.  Bui.  17. 

4  Wisconsin  Sta.  Rpt.  1884,  p.  87. 

5  New  York  State  Sta.  Rpt.  1886,  p.  28. 
6New  Hampshire  Sta.  Bui.  8. 

7  New  York  Cornell  Sta.  Bui.  25. 

8Maine  Sta.  Rpts.  1889,  p.  106,  and  1890,  p.  17. 


414  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

breeds  was  6  to  8  pounds,  consisting  of  2  parts  of  corn  meal  and  1  part 
each  of  cotton-seed  meal  and  wheat  bran.  The  same  station  '  in  a  105 
days'  test  of  3  cows  obtained  an  increase  of  20  to  36  per  cent — an  aver- 
age of  about  5  pounds  per  day — in  the  yield  of  milk  by  substituting  2 
pounds  each  of  cotton-seed  meal  and  gluten  meal  for  4  pounds  of  corn 
meal  in  rations  otherwise  alike,  the  milk  from  the  nitrogenous  ration 
being  as  a  rule  higher  in  total  solids  than  that  from  the  corn  meal 
ration. 

At  the  Vermont  Station2  a  farrow  cow  ate  a  maximum  of  12  pounds 
equal  parts  of  cotton-seed  meal  and  wheat  bran  with  coarse  foods  for 
16  days  and  gave  slight  increase  of  milk  of  about  the  same  quality. 
This  cow  afterwards  died  from  overfeeding,  but  not  until  some  time 
after  the  grain  ration  had  been  changed. 

At  the  Massachusetts  Station3  equal  weights  of  cotton-seed  meal 
were  compared  with  gluten  meal,  linseed  meal,  and  corn  meal  in  differ- 
ent rations.  From  the  results  as  stated  it  appears  that  the  yield  of 
milk  was  somewhat  larger  when  cotton-seed  meal  was  fed  than  when 
either  gluten  meal  or  linseed  meal  was  used,  while  with  corn  meal4 
there  was  practically  no  difference  in  yield.  The  net  cost  of  the  cotton- 
seed meal  rations  was  less  than  any  of  the  others,  on  account  of  the 
increased  manurial  value  of  cotton-seed  meal  over  the  other  meals. 

EUROPEAN  EXPERIMENTS. 

Bitter5  fed  milch  cows  137 J  pounds  of  peanut  meal  with  other  foods 
in  a  12-day  period,  and  obtained  an  average  daily  milk  yield  of  484.3 
liters  (liter  =  1.05  quarts).  In  a  second  period  of  15  days  the  same 
cows  ate  137i  pounds  of  cotton-seed  meal,  with  the  same  basal  ration  . 
as  before,  and  gave  503.8  liters  of  milk  daily.  The  cotton-seed  meal 
ration  thus  produced  19£  liters  more  milk  daily  than  the  peanut-meal 
ration. 

Siewert6  found,  in  a  series  of  experiments,  uudecorticated  Egyptian 
cotton-seed  cake,  as  a  rule,  to  be  of  less  value  for  milk  production  than 
rape-seed  cake,  but  states  that  the  former  has  been  found  better  for 
fattening  and  safer  to  feed  to  young  cattle.  One  and  one-fourth  pounds 
of  American  decorticated  cotton  cake  in  ration  produced  more  milk  than 
2£  pounds  of  the  uudecorticated  Egyptian  cake  in  the  same  ration,  and 
as  much  as  2  pounds  of  rape  cake.  Siewert  claims  that  the  cotton-seed 
cakes  increased  the  sugar  content  of  the  milk  over  rape  cake  and  reduced 
the  fat.     Preser7  fed  5  cows  8.8  pounds  of  hay,  11  of  cut  straw,  Q6  of 

'Maine  Sta.  Ept.  1893,  p.  73.| 

2 Vermont  Sta.  Rpt.  1890,  p.  75. 

Massachusetts  State  Sta.  Rpt.  1891,  p.  44. 

"Massachusetts  State  Sta.  Rpt.  1892,  p.  28. 

5Mileh  Ztg.,  1879,  p.  561;  abs.  in  Jahresber.  agr.  Chem.,  2,  p.  431. 

eLandw.  Vers.  Stat.,  30  (1884),  p.  145;  abs.  in  Jahresber.  agr.  Chem.,  7  (1884),  p.  516. 

7Wien  Landw.  Ztg.,  1880,  p.  527;  abs.  in  Jahresber.  agr.  Chem.,  3  (1880),  p.  467. 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS.    415 

sugar-beet  diffusion  residue,  and  6.6  of  cotton-seed  meal  per  bead  and 
day,  and  obtained  very  large  increase  in  live  weight. 

Schrodt  and  von  Peter1  fed  cotton-seed  meal  and  peanut  meal  in 
rations  otherwise  alike  to  3  cows  for  milk  production,  and  obtained 
results  favorable  to  cotton-seed  meal.  Pogge2  compared  2.2  pounds  of 
cotton-seed  meal  with  the  same  amount  of  peanut  meal  in  rations  other- 
wise alike.  Ten  cows  in  2  lots  were  fed  each  ration  for  15  days.  More 
milk  and  butter  was  produced  on  the  cotton-seed  meal  ration  than  on 
the  peanut-meal  ration,  the  butter  from  the  two  rations  being  equally 
good.  Backkaus3  added  2.2  pounds  of  peanut  cake,  2.2  of  cotton-seed 
cake,  and  3.3  of  palm-nut  cake  per  head  and  day  to  the  same  basal 
ration  of  10  cows  in  separate  periods  of  about  two  weeks  each.  He 
concludes  that  there  was  no  practical  difference  in  the  cakes  in  their 
effect  on  either  the  milk  production  or  fat  content  of  the  milk,  and 
further  infers  that  the  fat  content  of  milk  can  be  but  little  changed  by 
the  manner  of  feeding. 

The  Halle  Experiment  Station,4  in  experiments  in  cooperation  with 
farmers,  fed  cotton-seed  meal  to  1,375-pound  cows  in  increasing  propor- 
tions from  1.78  pounds  to  4.69,  and  barley  meal  in  decreasing  amounts 
from  4.40  to  2.38  pounds,  with  the  same  basal  ration.  The  nutritive 
ratio  was  thus  reduced  from  1 : 4.9  to  1 : 3.6  without  materially  affecting 
tbe  milk  yield.  The  feeding  was  liberal  in  amount,  and  the  financial 
results  were  slightly  better  on  the  narrow  ration,  on  account  of  its 
greater  manurial  value. 

EFFECT  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS  ON  THE  QUALITY  OF  BUTTER. 

With  reference  to  the  effect  of  cotton  seed  and  cotton- seed  meal  on 
the  quality  of  butter,  several  experiments  have  been  made  which 
showed  that  the  melting  point  of  the  butter  was  higher  and  the  vola- 
tile fatty  acids  lower  with  cotton  seed  or  cotton-seed  meal  than  without 
it;  i.  e.,  that  a  firmer,  harder  butter,  which  stood  handling  better,  was 
produced  on  these  foods.  This  was  observed  by  Curtis  and  Harrington 
in  several  experiments  at  the  Texas  Station,  the  data  for  which  are 
summarized  in  the  following  table: 

1  Milch  Ztg.,  1881,  Nos.  36  and  37;  abs.  in  Jabresber.  agr.  Cheni.,  4  (1881),  p.  442. 
2Landw.  Ann.  meckl.  pat.  Ver.,  1881,  No.  22. 
3  Jour.  Landw.,  41  (1893),  No.  4,  p.  328  (E.  S.  R.,  5,  p.  917). 

4Marcker  and  Morgen,  Magd.  Ztg.,  1888,  Nos.  597  and  625;  abs.  in  Jabresber.  agr. 
Chem.,  12  (1889),  p.  611 ;  and  E.  S.  R.,  3,  p.  564. 


416 


THE  COTTON  PLANT. 


Effect  of  cotton-seed  products  on  butter. 
[Texas  Station,  (a)] 


Corn  ;m<l  cob  meal,  oats,  bran,  si- 
lage, sorghum,  peavine  bay,  and 
pasture 

Cotton  seed  hulls  and  cotton  .seed 
meal 

Raw  or  cooked  whole  cotton  seed 

I  part  cotton-seed  meal,  3  purts 
oats,  sorghum,  hay,  and  scant 
pasture  

Equal  parts  cooked  cotton  seed 
and  oats,  and  scant  pasture 

5  pounds  millet  and  peavine  hay, 
5  pounds  bran,  6  pounds  corn 
meal,  and  good  pasture 

Corn  meal,  wheat  bran,  and  silage 
One-fourth  ration  cotton-seed  meal 

One-half  ration  cotton-seed  meal. 

Three-fourths  ration  cotton-seed 
meal 

Cotton  seed  hulls  and  cottonseed 
meal 


Days 

on  feed 

Num-  j  before 

ber  of   taking 

cows,   sample 

of 

butter. 


Examination  of 
butter. 


Melt- 
ing 
point 
of  hut 
ter. 


Vola- 
tile 
fatty 
acids 
of  but- 
ter, (b) 


*  0. 

35.  2     28.  82 


40.8  '  20.30 
40.4  '   15.70 


37.  3  I  20.  28 
36.6     26.78 


Iodin 
num- 
ber. 


Grading  of  butter. 


Flavor  Grain 

45     [     30 
points,  points. 


33    \ 

16  / 
21  K 
25    j 

17  1 

14  \> 

14    \ 


26.  DO  30.  22 

23.  72  32.  38 

I 

20.05  j  33.04 

16.24  j  35.39 

12.15  !  42.34 

I 


39.25  25.02 

30.93  18.50 

33.59  21.07      20.54 

34.48  21.87      20.67 


Body 

points, 


Total 
grade 

100 
points. 


22. 24       80.  51 


38.12     25.44 


75.  80 
7C.90 


22.23  !     85.79 


a  Texas  Sta.  Rpt.  1889,  p.  100;  Buls.  11  and  29. 


b  Calculated  for  5  grains  of  butter. 


The  authors  concluded  that  cotton  seed  and  its  products  raised  the 
melting  point  and  lowered  the  volatile  fatty  acids  of  butter  very  materi- 
ally, and  produced  a  light-colored  butter  of  inferior  quality  when  fed 
alone,  as  a  large  part  of  the  grain  ration,  or  with  scant  pasturage,  the 
butter  being  poor  in  flavor  and  presenting  the  appearance  of  having 
been  overworked;  but  when  cotton  products  formed  only  a  moderate 
part  of  the  grain  ration,  or  were  fed  with  good  pasturage,  the  quality 
was  little  affected,  the  butter  being,  firmer  and  standing  shipment 
better  than  that  made  when  no  cotton-seed  products  were  fed. 

H.  W.  Wiley1  examined  some  of  the  above  butters  sent  him  by  Har- 
rington and  made  experiments  in  connection  with  the  Maryland  Experi- 
ment Station,  which,  together  with  those  of  Lupton  and  Anderson  at 
the  Alabama  College  Station,2  confirmed  the  above  results  in  general. 

Wiley  found  that  cotton-seed  meal  increased  the  melting  point  and 
decreased  the  iodin  absorption  and  the  volatile  acids  (slightly);  and 
the  butter  also  showed  reducing- action  on  silver  nitrate.  The  experi- 
ments of  Lupton  and  Anderson  indicated  that  cotton  seed  and  cotton- 
seed meal  usually  increased  the  melting  point  of  butter  about  7°  C, 


^roc.  Soc.  Prom.  Agl.  Sci.,  1889,  p.  84;  See  also  W.  Frear  in  Agl.  Sci.,  7  (1893), 
p.  131. 

2  Alabama  Colie<re  Sta.  Bui.  25. 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS. 


417 


and  diminished  to  a  marked  degree  the  volatile  acids,  but  they  state 
that  no  change  was  observable  in  the  color  of  the  butter.  Iu  experi- 
ments by  Hunt  at  the  Pennsylvania  Station  to  test  the  relative  effect 
of  cotton-seed  meal  and  wheat  bran  on  the  quality  of  butter,  only 
the  melting  point  and  the  general  quality  of  the  product  were  deter- 
mined. The  butter  made  on  cotton-seed  meal  had  a  considerably  lower 
melting  point  than  that  made  on  bran,  and  was  rated  considerably 
lower  by  all  the  judges  to  whom  it  was  sent.  Wood  and  Parsons,  in 
experiments  at  the  New  Hampshire  Station,1  found  that  cotton-seed 
meal  produced  an  unusually  hard  butter,  and  Morse,  in  experiments  at 
the  same  station,2  found  that  cotton-seed  meal  depressed  the  volatile 
acids  and  iodin  number.  Cotton  seed  had  slightly  more  effect  on  these 
factors  than  cotton-seed  meal,  and  cotton-seed  oil  depressed  the  volatile 
acids  more  than  either  cotton-seed  meal  or  seed,  but  the  iodin  number 
only  slightly. 

In  experiments  by  Jordan  at  the  Maine  Station  in  1891, 3  the  butter 
produced  on  a  ration  of  cotton-seed  meal,  bran,  and  corn  meal  was 
harder:  contained  a  larger  amount  of  volatile  acids,  and  showed  a 
higher  iodin  number  than  that  produced  on  a  ration  of  linseed  meal, 
bran,  and  corn  meal,  or  of  pea  and  barley  meal;  but  in  experiments 
in  1893,  in  which  a  ration  of  2  pounds  of  corn  meal,  2  pounds  of  cotton- 
seed meal,  and  2  pounds  of  gluten  meal  was  compared  with  one  of  6 
pounds  of  corn  meal,  there  was  no  difference  in  the  butters  shown  by 
chemical  tests. 

The  data  for  the  above  experiments,  as  well  as  for  tests  made  by 
Dean  and  James  at  the  Ontario  Agricultural  College,4  are  summarized 
in  the  following  table: 

Effect  of  cotton-seed  products  on  butter. 


Kation. 


WILEY'S  RESULTS,  (a) 


Pasturage 

10  pounds  cotton-seed  meal  per  day  and  light  pas- 
turage   


ALABAMA  STATION  EXPERIMENTS.  (6) 


5  pounds  oats,  5  pounds  corn,  5  pounds  bran 

3  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  4  pounds  oats,  5  pounds 
bran,  11  pounds  silage 

4  pounds  cotton-seed  meal,  9  pounds  cotton-seed 
bulls,  4k  pounds  silage 

Raw  cotton  seed  and  cotton-seed  bulls 

Cooked  cotton  seed  and  cotton-seed  hulls 


Num- 
ber of 
cows. 


_  Examination  of  butter 

Days  on  < 

feed 
before       Melting 
taking      point  of 
sample.      butter 


o  C. 
35.4 


35.6 

36.1 

37.4 
43.6 
42.7 


Volatile 

fatty  Iodin 

acids  of     number, 
butter. 


22.4 
21.1 


29.8 

30.  5 

27.5 
22.1 
22.5 


38.9 
34.7 


a  Proc.  Soc.  Prom.  Agl.  Sci.  1889,  p.  84. 


b  Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  25. 


1  New  Hampshire  Sta.  Bui.  13. 

2  New  Hampshire  Sta.  Buls.  16, 18,  and  20. 

3  Maine  Sta.  Rpt.  1891,  p.  62. 

*  Ontario  Agl.  College  Rpt.  1891,  p.  166. 


1993— No.  33- 


-St 


418 


THE    COTTON    PLANT. 


Effect  of  cotton -need  products  on  butter — Continued. 


Ration. 


NEW  HAMPSHIRE  STATION  EXPERIMENTS,  (a) 


40  pounds 
middling 

meal  . .  - 
40  pounds 

dlings,  7 
40  pounds 

dlings.  6 
40  pounds 

dlings,  3 

seed  oil 


silage,  5J  pounds  hay,  2.05  pounds  each  of 
;s,  corn  meal,  cottonseed  meal,  and  gluten 


silage,  5J  pounds  hay,  2.05  pounds  mid- 
25  pounds  cotton-seed  meal 

•silage,  5,\  pounds  hay,  2.05  pounds  mid- 
25  pounds  raw  cotton  seed 

silage,  5&  pounds  hay,  2.05  pounds  mid- 
.5  pounds"  gluten  meai,  13.5  ounces  cotton  - 


ONTARIO  AGRICULTURAL  COLLEGE  EXPERIMENTS,  (b) 


Pasture 

30  pounds  hay,  9  pounds  linseed  meal 

20  pounds  hay,  4  pounds  linseed  meal,  5  pounds  cot- 
ton-seed meal 

30  pounds  hay,  9  pounds  cotton-seed  meal 


Num- 
ber of 
cows. 


Days  on 

feed 

before 

taking 

sample. 


Examination  of  butter. 


Melting 
point  of 
butter 


°0. 


32.3 
33 


34.6 
36.5 


Volatile 

fatty  Iodin 

acids  of    number, 
butter. 


29.9 
24.9 
20.3 

19.7 


38.8 

34 

33.8 

37.8 


24.4 
37 


a  New  Hampshire  Sta.  Bui.  16. 


J)  Ontario  Agl.  College  Rpt.  1891,  p.  166. 


The  figures  for  the  experiments  of  Harrington  and  Adriance  are  the 
averages  of  the  tests  of  the  two  sets  of  animals  on  the  days  when  they 
had  been  longest  on  the  ration.  They  show  an  increase  in  melting 
point  and  iodin  absorption,  and  a  decrease  in  the  volatile  acids  accord- 
ing to  the  proportion  of  cotton-seed  meal  in  the  ration.  These  observ- 
ers state  that  one-fourth  ration  of  cotton  seed  or  cotton-seed  meal  does 
not  materially  affect  the  quality  of  the  butter,  and  that  the  effect  of 
cotton-seed  meal  on  butter  was  apparent  thirty  days  after  it  had  been 
discontinued  in  the  ration,  which  has  an  important  bearing  on  all  the 
results  above,  indicating  that  few  of  them,  perhaps,  were  continued  long 
enough  to  show  the  maximum  effect  of  the  cotton- seed  meal  on  the  but- 
ter. The  results  of  Dean  and  James  show  a  marked  increase  in  melt- 
ing point  of  the  butter  where  cotton-seed  meal  was  fed.  Lloyd ]  states 
tli at  butter  from  steamed  cotton  seed  was  superior  to  that  from  either 
raw  seed  or  meal,  and  Brooks2  reports  that  butter  produced  from  cotton- 
seed meal  was  hard  and  of  a  greasy  texture.  As  the  result  of  two 
years'  experience  at  the  New  York  State  Station3  the  butter  made  from 
cotton  seed  meal  was  graded  first  in  "firmness,"  and  second  in  "  yield, 
color,  and  grain,"  as  compared  with  butter  made  from  oats,  linseed 
meal,  and  corn  meal  in  different  rations.  Mayer4  found  cotton-seed 
cake  in  rations  with  rye  straw  and  pea  straw  to  produce  butter  with 
more  volatile  fatty  acids  and  lower  melting  point  than  peanut,  sesame, 
linseed,  or  poppy-seed  cakes  with  different  coarse  foods. 


1  Mississippi  Sta.  Bui.  21. 

2  Massachusetts  Agl.  College  Catalogue,  1893,  p.  30  (E.  S.  R.  5,  p.  969). 

3  New  York  State  Sta.  Ept.  1889,  p.  211. 

"Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  41  (1893),  p.  15;  abs.  in  Agl.  Sci.,7  (1893),  p.  126  (E.  S.R.,5, 
p.  509). 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS.    419 
EFFECT  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS  ON  CHURNABILITY. 

The  Texas  Station1  found  that  as  compared  with  corn-and-cob  meal 
cotton  seed  and  cotton-seed  meal  facilitated  and  increased  very  mate- 
rially the  amount  of  cream  that  would  rise  by  gravity  at  high  (70°  F.) 
and  low  (45°  F.)  temperatures,  but  with  centrifugal  creaming  this  dif- 
ference due  to  foods  disappeared.  At  70°  F.  the  increase  was  8.5  per 
cent  and  14  at  45°  F.,  the  results  being  averages  on  cows  fresh  in  milk, 
in  medium  milk,  and  well  advanced  in  milk.  Cotton  seed  and  cotton- 
seed meal  cream,  however,  had  to  be  churned  at  4°  to  8°  F.  higher 
temperature  if  sour,  and  1°  to  3°  F.  if  sweet,  than  cream  from  corn-and- 
cob  meal  and  other  foods.  Hunt2  observed  that  milk  from  cows  fed 
cotton-seed  meal  creamed  better  by  gravity  than  that  from  cows  fed 
bran,  and  Parsons  and  Wood3  state  that  gluten  meal  decreases  the 
churnability  of  fat  as  compared  with  corn  meal  or  cotton-seed  meal. 
Mayer4  found  milk  from  cotton-seed  cake  rations  to  be  harder  to  churn 
than  that  from  peanut,  sesame,  linseed,  or  poppy-seed  cake  rations. 

EFFECT   OF    COTTON-SEED    PRODUCTS    ON   THE    HEALTH   OF   ANIMALS. 

Where  sickness,  death,  or  other  disturbances  have  occurred  with  the 
animals  in  the  previously  reported  experiments,  the  fact  was  there 
noted.  Other  observations  as  to  the  effect  of  cotton-seed  products  on 
the  health  of  animals  are  brought  together  here.  Whether  cotton  pro- 
ducts contain  originally  a  toxic  principle,  or  whether  such  is  developed 
as  the  result  of  decomposition  outside  or  of  change  within  the  animal 
body  is  yet  an  open  question.  Emmerling5  assumes  that  the  decom- 
position products  of  the  organisms  in  cotton  seed  residues  are  respon- 
sible for  the  bad  effect  of  the  residues,  while  the  experiments  of  Bret- 
feld6  lead  him  to  believe  that  such  is  not  the  case.  Bohm  and  Maxwell7 
found  cholin,  and  Ritthausen,  Weger,  and  Maxwell  found  betai'n  in 
cotton-seed  meal  (see  article  on  chemistry  of  cotton,  p.  90).  Cholin  is 
stated  to  possess  toxical  property,8  but  betai'n  is  considered  a  nonpoison- 
ous  base.  Harrington9  examined  the  blood  and  viscera  of  hogs  dying 
from  the  effects  of  cotton-seed  meal  poisoning  for  ptomaines  with  nega- 
tive results.  From  the  variety  of  symptom  s  of  sickness  and  post-mortem 
results,  it  would  appear  that  there  are  a  number  of  causes  of  sickness 
rather  than  a  single  disease.  The  ill  effects  of  cotton  products  on  hogs 
are  variously  credited  to  the  loose  lint,  the  large  amount  of  fat,  the 

1  Texas  Sta.  Buls.  11  and  14. 
-  Pennsylvania  Sta.  Bui.  17. 

3  New  Hampshire  Sta.  Bui.  13. 

4  Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  41  (1893),  p.  15. 

8  Centbl.  agr.  Ckem.,  1884,  p.  472. 

e  Jour.  Landw.,  1887,  p.  37 ;  abs.  in  Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  42  (1894),  p.  305. 

7  Amer.  Chem.  Jour.,  13  (1891),  p.  469. 

8Bernthsen,  Lehrbuch  der  organiscben  Cbemie,  1887,  p.  183,  states  otherwise. 

9  Texas  Sta.  Bui.  15. 


420  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

hard  and  sharp  seed  coats,  etc.,  while  with  ruminating  animals  the 
blame  has  fallen  on  moldy  cakes  and  meal,  impurities,  hulls,  or  fiber  in 
them,  etc.     (See  p.  380.) 

A  review  for  1886, '  published  by  the  Baltic  Centralverein,  notes  that 
in  many  instances  where  sheep  and  cattle  were  fed  small  quantities  of 
cotton  seed  meal  sickness  and  death  followed,  but,  strange  to  say,  only 
male  animals  were  affected.  Briigmann 2  states  that  a  1-year-old  steer 
fed  cotton-seed  meal  in  water  died,  while  other  steers  and  young  cattle 
given  dry  cotton-seed  meal  did  well.  lie  therefore  warns  against 
feeding  moist  cotton-seed  meal.  Klein  3  cites  a  case  where  a  cow  died 
from  having  eaten  cotton -seed  cake  insufficiently  broken  up.  Nathu- 
sius4  observed  for  several  years  that  the  uterus  of  ewes  which  had 
been  fed  considerable  quantities  of  cotton -seed  meal  immediately 
after  lambing  became  highly  inflamed  and  the  sheep  soon  died.  It  is 
stated  that  only  those  animals  eating  American  cotton-seed  meal  were 
affected,  and  when  the  use  of  the  meal  was  stopped  the  trouble  disap- 
peared. Belief  was  found  in  the  use  of  carbolic  acid  wash.  Gautier5 
reports  sickness  in  calves  and  Bongarz0  injuries  to  calves  and  sheep 
from  feeding  cotton-seed  meal.  Gips7  reports  the  death  of  3  out  of  8 
cattle  made  sick  from  eating  moldy  cotton  seed  cake.  Esser8  reports 
the  death  of  about  100  fattening  lambs  after  a  few  days'  feeding  on 
250  gm.  cotton-seed  meal  as  auxiliary  food.  The  meal  seemed  of  good 
quality  and  was  fed  to  oxen  without  injury.  Schwanefeldt0  reports  the 
death  of  calves  from  eating  cotton-seed  meal,  and  Peschel10  of  cows 
dying  of  fever  attributed  to  the  effects  of  cotton-seed  cake.  Klein11 
fed  cotton-seed  cake  to  12  rabbits  and  to  carp.  All  the  animals  except 
one  rabbit  died  in  a  short  time  of  inflammation  of  the  bowels.  Marcker 
observed  in  feeding  cotton- seed  meal  to  sheep  that  while  ewes  would 
not  be  affected,  male  sheep  sickened  on  much  smaller  rations.  Post- 
mortem examination  showed  magnesium  ammonium  phosphate  calculi 
in  the  bladder,  which  probably  caused  irritation  and  could  not  be 
expelled  so  easily  from  males  as  from  females. 12    Emery, 13  of  the  iS  orth 

'Landw.  Vereinsschr.  bait.  Cent.  Ver.,  April,  1887;  abs.  in  Centbl.  agr.  Cheui.,  1886, 
p.  716. 

-Hannov.  land-  und  forstw.  Ztg,,  16  (1885),  p.  318;  Centbl.  agr.  Chem.,  11  (1885), 
p.  353. 

:i  Konigsberger.  land-  und  forstw.  Ztg.,  1886 ;  abs.  in  Jahresber.  agr.  Cbem.,  9  (1886), 
p.  397. 

■Tuhling  a  landw.  Ztg.,  35  (1886),  p.  114;  abs.  in  Jahresber.  agr.  Chem.,  9  (1886), 
p.  397. 

5Deut.  Ztschr.  fiir  Tiermedizin,  12  (1885-86),  p.  377. 

6Archiv.  fiir  wissensfh.  und  prakt.  Tierheilkunde,  14  (1886),  p.  86. 

7Ibid.,  12  (1886),  p.  74. 

8  Abs.  in  Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  42  (1894),  p.  303. 

9Archiv.  fiir  wissenseb.  und  prakt.  Tierbeilkunde,  12  (1886),  p.  74. 

10 Abs.  in  Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  42  (1894),  p.  3Q3. 

11  Centbl.  agr.  Chem.,  1884,  p.  772. 

13Ber.  20te  Plenar.  deut.  Landwirtschaftsrates,  Berlin,  1892. 

13 North  Carolina  Sta.  Bui.  10y. 


THE  FEEDING  VALUE  OF  COTTON-SEED  PRODUCTS.    421 

Carolina  Station,  states  tliat  3  milch  cows  at  different  times  had  dis- 
turbances of  tlie  nervous  system  from  eating  cotton- seed  meal,  and  that 
one  died  from  eating  old  cottonseed  meal. 

Voelcker1  mentions  the  death  of  5,00G  sheep  and  lambs  and  serious 
injury  to  many  others  alleged  to  have  been  caused  by  eating-  decorticated 
cotton-seed  cake.  The  cake  was  of  good  quality,  and  the  sickness  and 
death  are  ascribed  to  overeating.  He  also  reports2  injury  to  the 
health  of  cattle,  and  one  death,  from  eating  cotton-seed  cake  of  good 
quality  in  which  no  poison  could  be  found,  and  states  that  the  injury 
which  the  cakes  undoubtedly  did  "was  clearly  traced  to  the  coarse  con- 
dition and  consequent  indigestibility  of  the  cotton-seed  husks  in  them." 
The  same  authority 3  states  that  "  instances  in  which  very  moldy  feeding 
cakes  have  injured  or  killed  cattle  are  too  numerous  to  leave  any  room 
for  doubt  of  the  injurious  properties  of  damaged  or  moldy  linseed  or 
other  feeding  cakes."  Instances  of  death  or  injury  to  health  of  animals 
resulting  from  eating  moldy  cakes,  oats,  and  other  foods  are  numerous 
and  have  been  ascribed  to  a  mold  (As2)ergillus  spp.)  known  to  be  poi- 
sonous to  animals.  Zopf  found  in  cotton-seed  meal  several  organisms, 
particularly  Bacterium  vernicosum,  which  exercised  poisonous  powers.4 

REFERENCES    TO    ADDITIONAL    ARTICLES    ON    FEEDING    COTTON 

PRODUCTS. 

Feeding  for  beef. 

Arkansas  Sta.  Buls.  9  and  23. 

Maryland  Sta.  Bui.  8. 

Mississippi  Agl.  and  Mech.  College  Rpt.  No.  3, 1885. 

Mississippi  Sta.  Rpt.  1889,  p.  37. 

Missouri  Sta.  Bui.  2. 

New  York  State  Sta.  Rpts.  1888,  p.  292;  1889,  p.  117;  1890.  p.  20. 

U.  S.  Consular  Rpt.,  August,  1886,  p.  331. 

Jour.  Roy.  Agl.  Soc.  England,  22  (1886),  p.  483 ;  23  (1887),  p.  403. 

Trans.  Highland  and  Agl.  Soc.  Scotland,  ser.  4,  6  (1879),  p.  312. 

Wesen  und  Verwertung  der  getrockneten  Diffusions -Riickstiinde  des  Zuckerfabriken, 

Miircker  and  Morgen,  Berlin,  1891,  p.  157. 
Hannov.  land,  und  forstw.  Ztg.,  1885,  No.  36,  p.  709. 
Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  42  (1894),  p.  279. 
Fiililing's  landw.  Ztg.,  1893,  No.  13,  p.  439. 

Feeding  for  milk  and  butter. 

Alabama  College  Sta.  Bui.  5  (n.  ser.). 
Mississippi  Sta.  Rpt.  1889,  p.  36. 
Missouri  Sta.  Bui.  8. 
New  Hampshire  Sta.  Bui.  18. 
New  Jersey  Sta.  Bui.  65. 

New  York  State  Sta.  Rpts.  1890,  pp.  8  and  171 ;  1891,  p.  28 ;  1892,  p.  39 ;  and  Bui.  21 
(n.  ser.). 

'Jour.  Roy.  Agl.  Soc.  England,  8  (1872),  pt.  1,  p.  219. 

2  Ibid.,  12  (1876),  pt.  1,  p.  295. 

3  Jour.  Roy.  Agl.  Soc.  England,  9  (1873),  pt.  1,  p.  1. 

4  Zur  Kenntnis  der  Organismen  des  ainerikanischen  Baumwollsaatmehl,  Beitrag 
aus  Kryp.  Lab.  Univ.  Halle,  1892. 


422  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

Vermont  Sta.  Ept.  1889,  p.  51. 

Experiments  on  ensilage  conducted  at  Kotbamsted,  season  1884-85,  Sir  J.  B.  Lawes 

and  J.  H.  Gilbert,  London,  1886;  abs.  in  Jabresber.  agr.  Cbem.,  12  (1889),  p.  609. 
Magd.  Ztg.,  Nov.  21  and  Dec.  6,  1888;  abs.  in  Jabresber.  agr.  Cbem.,  12  (1889),  p.  611; 

and  E.  S.  E.,  3,  pp.  562,  566,  569. 
Prog.  Agr.,  1891,  Nov.  15;  abs.  in  Jour.  Amer.  Cbem.  Soc,  15  (1893),  p.  659. 
Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  38  (1891).  p.  349. 
Milcb  Ztg.,  19  (1890),  p.  722 ;  20  (1891),  No.  7. 
Landbote,  1893,  p.  517. 

Digestibility. 

Nortb  Carolina  Sta.  Buls.  87d,  97,  and  111. 
Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  44  (1896),  p.  135. 

Cause  of  injury  to  health,  etc. 

Landw.  Vers.  Stat.,  42  (1893),  p.  279. 


J 


SUPPLEMENTAL  BIBLIOGRAPHY  OF  COTTON. 


The  following  is  a  list  of  publications  relating  to  cotton  which  are 
not  specifically  referred  to  in  the  preceding  articles,  but  many  of  which 
have  been  used  in  the  preparation  of  the  bulletin.  The  references 
have  been  arranged  alphabetically,  by  authors,  as  far  as  possible,  the 
general  character  of  many  of  the  works  and  the  inaccessibility  of  others 
rendering  a  topical  arrangement  impossible: 

Abbey,  R.     Cotton  and  cotton  planters.     De  Bow,  vols.  2,  p.  133 ;  3,  p.  1. 

Agassiz,  Prof,  and  Mrs.  Louis.     Journey  in  Brazil.     1868.     p.  507. 

Age  of  cotton.     Am.  Mo.  Mag.,  11,  p.  1. 

Agl.  Hort.  Society  of  India.     Journals,  transactions,  and  proceedings. 

Aiken.     Biographical  Dictionary.     10  vols. 

Aiton.     Hort.  Kew.  (ed.  II),  IV,  p.  223. 

Allen,  S.  M.     Fibrilia  a  substitute  for  cotton.     Boston,  1861. 

Alpino.     PI.  ^Egypt.,  tab.  19,  p.  38. 

American  cotton.     All  the  Year,  vol.  5,  p.  234. 

American  and  Indian  cotton.     Hunt.,  vol.  17,  p.  325. 

American  Museum,  1790,  July.     Correspondence  from  Charleston,  S.  C,  describing 
cotton  ginning. 

Anderson,  A.     Historical  and  chronological  deduction  of  the  origin  of  commerce. 
London,  1769. 

Andersson.     Om.  Galepag.     1854-1861. 

Andrews,  A.     Cotton  in  Brazil.     Colburn,  132,  p.  175. 

Cotton  in  Egypt.     Colburn,  132,  pp.  70, 449. 

Possibilities  of  cotton  supply.     Colburn,  133,  pp.  230,  243;  134,  p.  105. 

Annual  reports  on  cotton,  1870-1872.     Bankers'  Mo.  (N.  Y.),  27,  p.  289. 

Archer,  T.  C.     Pop.  Econ.  Botany,  pp.  170-181. 

Arnold,  R.  A.     History  of  the  cotton  famine  from  the  fall  of  Fort  Sumter. 

History  of  the  cottou  famine,  1865. 

Atkinson,  Edward.     Cotton  and  cotton  manufacture  in  the  United  States.     Boston, 
1880. 

Report  on  cotton  manufacture  of  1862. 

Cheap  cotton  by  free  labor. 

Cotton  manufacture  in  the  United  States.     Tenth  Census,  vol.  2. 

Report  on  English  mills  and  methods.     1883. 

Remarks  on  the  present  condition  of  the  cotton  trade,  etc.     London,  1867. 

Atkinson,  Thomas  W.     Him.  disc,  Vol.  X ;  Xorthwest  Province  Gaz.  India,  p.  738. 

Aytoun.     Origin  and  distribution  of  cotton  soils  of  India. 

Badier.     Mem.  Soc.  Roy.  Agr.  (1788). 

Bagnall,  Wm.  R.     The  textile  industries  of  the  United  States.     Vol.  1. 

Baillion,  H.     Nat.  history  of  plants,  pp.  154,155. 

Baird,  R.  H.     American  cotton   spinner  and   managers'  and  carders'  guide.     Phil- 
adelphia, 1887. 

Balfour,  Edward.     Cyclopaedia  of  India  and  Eastern  and  Southern  Asia,  commer- 
cial, industrial,  and  scientific.     Vol.  3.     1885. 

Balsamo.     Hybridation  artificielle  dans  le  genre  Gossyppium.     Compt.  Rend.,  65 
(1867),  p.  763. 

423 


424  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Bamia,  a  history  of  the  origin  of.     U,  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Libr.  Scrapbook,  "Cotton,"  pp. 

26,  27. 
Banerjei,  N.  N.     Eeport  on  the  agriculture  of  tbe  district  of  Cnttack.     Bengal,  1893. 
Barbie  du  Bocage.     Essai  sur  l'bistoire  du  commerce  anx  Indes  Orientales.     Revue 

Maritime,  1864. 
Bartling.     Ordines  Nat.  PI.     1830. 
Bartolo.     Delia  cultivazione  del  cotone.     1864. 

Basil,  B.  C.     Report  on  tbe  agriculture  of  tbe  district  of  Lobardaga.     Bengal,  1890. 
Batcbelder,  S.     Introduction  and  early  progress  of  cotton  manufacture  in  tbe  United 

States.     Boston,  1863. 
Baubinus,  Caspar.     Piuax  tbeatri  botanici,  p.  430. 
Baiihinus,  J.     Hist.  PL,  1,  p.  343. 

Bazley,  T.     Cotton  as  an  element  of  industry;  its  supply  and  consumption.     1852. 
Beaufort.     Indian  cotton  statistics. 
Bechmann,  Johan.     History  of  invention  and  discovery.     4  vols.     Translated  by  W. 

Johnston. 
Bentbam.     Bot.  Sulpb.,  p.  68. 
Bentbam  and  Hooker.     Gen.  PI.     Kew,     (1862.) 
Bentbam  and  Mueller.     Fl.  austr.,  I,  p.  220. 
Berlepscb,  H.  A.     Cbronik  der  Gewerbe,  9  Biinde,  in  5  v. 
Bertoloni.     Convm.  Acad.  Sci.  Inst.  Bonon.     II,  p.  213. 

Miscell.  bot.     6. 

Bevan,  G.  P.     Cotton  and  cotton  manufacture  (industrial   classes   and  industrial 

statistics,  vol.  2.     London,  1876-77). 
Birdwood,  Sir  Geo.     Bombay  products.     2  ed.     p.  337. 

Industrial  arts  of  India.     London,  1880. 

Blomeyer,  Adolpb.     Die  Cultur  der  landwirthschaftlichen  Nutzpflanzen.     2  vols. 

Leipzig,  1889-91. 
Bloomfield,  J.  E.     Cotton  and  its  culture.     Hunt,  pp.  45, 561. 
Boerbaave.     Ind.  alt.  pi.  bort.  lugd.,  p.  273. 
Bolles,  Albert   S.     Cotton  culture  and  manufacture  (industrial  history  of  United 

States.     Norwich,  1881). 
Bombay  Gazetteer.     Vol.  XXV.     Useful  plants  of  Bombay. 
Boston  memorial  on  cotton  manufacture.     Boston,  1846. 
Branner,  John  C.     Preliminary  report  on  insects  injurious  to  cotton,  etc.,  in  Brazil 

(U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Division  of  Entomology  Bui.  4,  pp.  63-69.    1884). 
Bregha,  L.     Praktiscbe  Handbuch  Baumwolle-Zeugdruckes,  etc.     Leipzig,  1880. 
Bretscbn eider.     Study  and  value  of  Chinese  botanical  works,     p.  7. 
Brookes,  C.  P.     Cotton  manufacture.     2  ed.     1889. 
Brown,  R.     Bot.  Index  Exped.  Australia,  Flinder's  Voyage  (1825-1834). 

In  Sturt  Exped.  Centr.  Austr.      11,  app.  68. 

Bruin,  Cornelius  de.     Travels  into  Muscovy,  Persia,  and  East  Indies. 

Brim,  Malta.     Geography.     Vols.  V,  p.  193;  VI,  p.  156. 

Bryers,  Thomas.     Tbe  student's  assistant  to  practical  cotton  spinning.     1884. 

Buchanan-Hamilton.     Journey  from  Madras  through  Mysore,  Canara,  and  Malabar. 

Vols.  I-III. 
Burman.  Fl.  ind. 
Burns.     Statistics  of  cotton. 

Capper,  J.     Cultivation  of  cotton  in  Asia.     Vol.  10,  p.  386. 
Carcenac,  H.     Des  coton,  du  cbanvre,  du  lin  et  des  laines  en  Italic     Paris,  1869. 

Des  laines  et  des  plantes  textiles  en  Portugal  et  dans  ses  Colonies.     Paris,  1869. 

Des  laines  et  des  plantes  textiles  en  Espagne  et  dans  ses  Colonies.     Paris,  1867. 

Le  coton  et  la  cultivation  des  plantes  textiles.     In  La  production  animale  et 

vege"tale.     Paris,  1867. 
Cardoza,  J.  M.     Supply  and  consumption  of  cotton.     De  Bow,  vol.  22,  p.  337. 
Carroll,  B.  R.     Historical  collections  of  South  Carolina.     2  vols.     New  York,  1836. 


SUPPLEMENTAL    BIBLIOGRAPHY    OF    COTTON.  425 

Catalogue  of  the  products  of  the  French  Colonies.    London  Exposition,  18G2.    p.  167. 

Cavanilles.     Diss.  hot.  (1788).     VI,  p.  310. 

Chapman,  A.  \Y.     Flora  of  the  Southern  United  States. 

Chapman,  J.     The  cotton  and  commerce  of  India.     1851. 

Christy,  D.     Cotton  is  king.     1855. 

Chronology  of  cotton.     American  Quart.  Reg.     Vol.  10,  p.  277. 

Clarke,  R.  T.     Extract  from  letter  on  hybridization  of  cottou.     College  pamphlets, 

Yale  Univ.,  No.  450. 
Coates,  B.     Cotton  cultivation  in  Africa. 

Conkling,  F.  A.     Production  and  consumption  of  cotton,  1865. 
Consular  Reports  (U.  S.) : 

Cotton  crop  of  Mexico  (Feb.,  1881). 

Cotton-seed  oil  iu  Franco  (April,  1881). 

Cotton-seed  oil  in  Italy  (April,  1881). 

Cotton-seed  oil  tariff  iu  Italy  (June,  1881). 

Cotton-goods  trade  of  the  world  (Oct.,  1881). 

Correction  in  cotton-goods  trade  of  the  world  (Jan.,  1882). 

Cotton-frauds  legislation  in  Bombay  (Feb.,  1882). 

Corrections  to  cotton-goods  trade  of  the  world  (Feb.,  1882). 

American  cotton  goods  at  China-Kiang  (March,  1882). 

American  cotton  goods  in  China  (May,  1882). 

Tax  upon  cotton-seed  oil  in  Italy  (May,  1882). 

Cotton-goods  trade  of  Japan  (June,  1882). 

Cotton  yarns  and  thread  in  Mexico  (July,  1882). 

Adulteration  of  American  cotton  (July,  1882). 

The  cotton  crop  of  Acapulco  (Aug.,  1882). 

Impure  cotton  (Dec,  1882). 

Mexican  cotton  crop  (Sept.,  1883). 

American  cottons  in  China  (Nov.,  1883). 

Cotton  and  cotton-goods  trade  of  Mexico  (April,  1884). 

Production  and  consumption  of  cotton  in  foreign  countries  (May,  1884). 

Condition  of  the  English  cotton  industry  (Aug.,  1885). 

Cultivation  of  cotton  in  Russia  (June  and  Aug.,  1887). 

Cultivation  of  cotton  in  Asiatic  Russia  (Jau., 

Packing  and  skix>inent  of  American  cotton  (Feb., 

Cultivation  of  cotton  in  Egypt  in  1888  (Jan.,  1889). 

The  cotton  crop  of  Egypt  (Aug.,  1889). 

Cotton  growing  and  cotton  industry  in  Russia  (Feb.,  1890). 

Cotton  in  Peru  (March,  1890). 

Cotton  in  Russia  (May,  1890). 

Cotton  cultivation  in  Egypt  (Sept.,  1890). 

Cotton,  wool,  and  wheat  in  Argentine  Republic  (Dec,  1890). 

Cotton  in  Brazil  (Dec,  1890). 

Cotton  textiles  in  foreign  countries  (special  report,  1890). 

Cotton  growing  in  Russia  (July,  1891). 

Indian  cotton  (Oct.,  1891). 

Peruvian  cotton  (June,  1892). 

American,  Egyptian,  and  Indian  cotton  baling  (Dec,  1893). 

Baling  cotton  and  hay  for  export  (Dec,  1893). 

Packing  goods  for  export — cotton  (Jan.,  1894). 

Objectionable  cotton  baling  (Feb.,  1894). 

Cotton-seed  mills  in  Europe  (Oct.,  1894). 

Cotton  baling  (May,  1895). 
Conway,  Moncure  D.     King  coal  and  king  cotton. 
Cotton,  H.  J.     New  India  or  India  in  transition.     London,  1885. 
Cotton  and  cotton  supply.     Once  a  Week,  vol.  5,  pp.  212,  238. 


426  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

Cotton  and  its  prospects.     De  Bow,  vol.  11,  p.  307. 

Cotton  and  sugar  culture  in  India.     De  Bow,  vol.  4,  p.  511. 

Cotton  culture  in  Central  Asia.     Chemiker  Zeitung,  1893,  Nos.  55,  57. 

Cotton  from  pod  to  factory,  etc.     London,  1842. 

Cotton  in  India.     Eclec.  Rev.,  pp.  115,  478. 

Cotton  in  India.     De  Bow,  vol.  9,  p.  314. 

Cotton  in  India.     Living  Age,  vol.  52,  p.  244. 

Cotton  in  India.     All  the  Year,  vol.  5,  p.  375. 

Cotton  in  the  South.     Saturday  Rev.,  vol.  64,  p.  292. 

Cotton  manufacture  in  India,  1851,  p.  150. 

Cotton-spinning  machines  and  their  inventors.     Quart.  Rev.,  Jan.,  1860. 

Cotton  supply.     A  letter  to  J.  Cheatham  hy  a  fellow  of  the  Royal  Geographical 

Society  (Anon.).     London,  1861. 
Coxe,  Treuch.     Memoir  of  February,   1817,   upon  the  subject  of  the  cotton-wool 

cultivation. 
An  addition  to  the  memoir  of  1817  on  cultivation  of  cotton,  etc.,  of  the  U.  S. 

Philadelphia,  1818. 

Statement  of  the  arts  and  manufactures  of  the  U.  S.     Philadelphia,  1814. 

Crawfurd,  John.     History  Indian  Archipelago. 

Creighton,  Andrew.     History  of  Arabia. 
Crum,  Walter.     Drawings  of  cotton  fiber.     1863. 

Cunningham,  Alexander.     Ancient  geography  of  India.     London,  1871. 
Cultivation  and  supply  of  cotton.     Home  and  Foreign  Review,  vol.  2,  p.  1. 
Cultivation  of  cotton  in  America  and  India.     Brit.  Quarterly,  vol.  9,  p.  354. 
Dalechamps,  Jacques.     Hist,  pi.,  p.  221. 
Dalzell  and  Gibson.     Bomb.  fl.  supp.  8. 

Darby,  J.     Botany  of  the  Southern  States.     New  York,  1855. 
Darlington.     Agric.  Botany,  p.  16. 

Davis,  Geo.  E.     Dreyfus,  C.     Holland,  P.     Sizing  and  mildew  in  cotton.     Manches- 
ter, 1880. 
Decaisne.     Herb.  Timor.     1835. 

Ann.  Mus.  Nat.  Hist.,  vol.  3,  p.  435. 

De  Candolle,  A.     Geographie  botanique  raisonnee,  1855,  vol.  2,  p.  971. 
De  Candolle,  A.  P.     Prod.  Syst.  Veg.,  Vol.  I,  p.  456. 

Origine  des  plantes  cultiv6es. 

De  Coin,  R.  L.     History  and  cultivation  of  cotton  and  tobacco.     London,  1864. 

Delisle  de  Sales,  Jean  B.  C.  I.     Histoire  des  Egyptiens  sous  les  Pharaons. 

Deming,  D.  B.     Competition  of  Algeria  in  cotton.     De  Bow,  vol.  24,  p.  193. 

Deschamps.     Le  coton,  1855,  p.  250. 

Desfoutaines.     Fl.  atl.     Vol.  2,  p.  121. 

Devincenzi.     Cotton  in  Italy,  1862,  p.  50. 

Dexter.     Growth  and  culture  of  cotton. 

Dictionary  of  Agriculture.     Algodon,  pp.  354-362.     Madrid,  1852. 

Dictionary  of  Commerce  (Blay).     Vol.  1,  pp.  693-722. 

Dietrich.     Syst.  PI.     Vol.  4,  p.  820. 

Dodge,  C.  R.     An.  Rpt.  Dept.  Agr.,  1879,  p   513. 

Paris  Exposition  Rpt.     1889,  Vol.  V,  p.  696. 

Dodomeus.     Pemptades,  p.  66,  ic.  1. 

Dolfus,  A.     Production  du  coton  (Com.  Imp.  del'Expos.  de  1867.     Rapports  V.     16). 

Don,  George.     Gen.  History  Dichlamyd.     Plants.     Vol.  1,  pp.  486,  487. 

Draper,  G.,  and  Son.     Improvements  in  cotton  machinery.     1872. 

Drapier,  D.     Filiature  de  coton.     Paris,  1858. 

Drapiez.     Diet,  des  sc.     Ill,  n.  124,  tab.  150. 

Drayton,  John.     A  view  of  South  Carolina.     1802. 

Dudley,  J.  G.     Cotton  :  growth,  trade,  and  manufacture.     N.  Y.,  1853, 

Durante.     Erb.  nuovo. 


SUPPLEMENTAL   BIBLIOGRAPHY    OF    COTTON.  427 

East  India  Co.  Reports  and  documents  [on]  the  culture  and  manufacture  of  cotton- 
wool, etc.,  in  India.     Londou,  1836. 

Edinb.  Quart.  Jour.  Agr.,  1854. 

Edwards.     In  bot.  reg.  1,  p.  84. 

Elliott,  Stephen.    Sketch  of  the  botany  of  South  Carolina.     Charleston,  1821.    2  vols. 

Ellison,  T.  Handbook  of  cotton  trade;  or  history,  condition,  and  prospects  of  cot- 
ton commerce.     London,  1858. 

Emerson,  G.  Cotton  in  the  Middle  States,  with  directions  for  its  easy  culture. 
Philadelphia,  1862. 

Encyclopedia  Americana. 

Encyclopedia  Britannica. 

Endlicher.     Gen.  PL,  p.  983,  n.     5279. 

Engel,  Ernst.     Baumwollen  Spinnerie  in  Sachsen.     1856. 

Entz,  J.  F.  Cotton  tables  exhibiting  cost  of  cotton,  with  all  charges  at  Liverpool  or 
Havre,  from  New  Orleans  and  New  York.     1853. 

Exchange  and  the  cotton  trade  between  England  and  the  United  States,  1840. 

Evlyn,  W.     Culture  of  cotton  in  India.     De  Bow,  n.  ser.  2,  p.  509. 

Fairall,  Hubert  S.  The  World's  Industrial  and  Cotton  Centennial  Exposition,  New 
Orleans,  1884-85.     Iowa  City,  1885. 

Fiber  of  the  cotton  plant,  investigation  of.     Patent  Office  Report,  1853.    pp.  181-195. 

Fields  for  cotton,  old  and  new.     All  the  Year,  vol.  6,  p.  125. 

Figuier,  L.     Vegetable  World,  p.  357. 

Focillon.  Essais  de  culture  du  coton  en  France.  (Com.  Imp.  de  l'Expos.  de  1867. 
Rapports  V.     4.) 

Forbes,  James.     Oriental  memoirs.     Vol.  II,  p.  222.     London,  1813,  4  vols. 

Forskal.     Fl.  .Egypt,  p.  81. 

Forster.     In  account  of  Cook's  second  voyage. 

Fuchs.     Hist.  pi.     p.  235. 

Furgusson,  W.  F.  Letter  to  Lord  Stanley  on  dearth  of  cotton  and  India's  ability  to 
supply.     London,  1863. 

Fuss,  Johann  D.     Roman  antiquities,  translated  by  Street.     Sec.  448.     Oxford,  1840. 

Galbraitb,  G.     Cotton  spinners'  companion.     Glasgow,  1836. 

Gay,  Claude.     Fl.  Chilena  I,  p.  312. 

Geldard,  James.     Handbook  of  cotton  manufacture,  1867. 

Gilroy,  Clinton  G.     Cotton:  conditions  of  its  successful  cultivation. 

History  of  silk,  cotton,  linen,  wool,  and  other  fibrous  substances.     New  York, 

1845. 

Gliddon.     Otia  ^Lgyptiaca.     London,  1849. 

Gliddon,  G.  R.     Memoir  on  the  cotton  of  Egypt.     London,  1841. 

Glover,  Townsend.  Original  drawings,  principally  of  cotton  insects,  and  other 
insects  injurious  or  beneficial  to  agriculture.     2  vols. 

Grady,  H.  W.     Cotton  and  its  kingdom.     In  J.  C.  Harris's  Life  of  H.  W.  Grady. 

Gray,  Asa.     Bot.  Wilkes  Exped.,  I,  p.  179. 

Plant,  thurb.  in  Mem.  Amer.  Acad.  Art.  and  Sci.,  new  ser.,  V,  p.  308. 

Gregoire.     De  la  culture  du  coton  in  Egypt,     p.  2. 

Grisebach.     Flora  of  the  British  West  Indies,     p.  82. 

Gronovius.     Orient.     208. 

Guest,  Richard.  History  of  cotton  manufacture,  with  a  disproval  of  Sir  R.  Ark- 
wrigbt's  claim  to  his  inventions.     Manchester,  1823. 

Guicciordina.  Description  of  the  low  countries.  Notes  on  history  of  fustian  manu- 
facture in  Flanders. 

Guillemin.     Zephyr,  taitensis  in  Ann.  Sci.  Nat.,  ser.  2,  VII,  1837,  p.  367. 

Gutierrez,  Donato.     El  algodonero,  Memoria. 

Algodonero.     Mexico,  1885. 

Hakluyt,  Eichard.  Collection  of  ancient  voyages.  Vol.  II,  p.  366  (ed.,  1809). 
London,  1809.     5  vole. 


428  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

Hale,  E.  E.     Cotton  in  New  England  history.     New  England  Mag.,  n.  ser.,  vol.  3,  p 

127. 
Hamilton.     Trans.  Lin.  Soc.     Vol.  13,  p.  492. 
Hardy.     Cat.  de  veget.  du  jard.  diacclim.  de  hamm.,  p.  124. 
Hardy,  Auguste.     Annales  de  l'agronome  du  cotou  en  Algerie.     Manuel  du  cultiva- 

teurdecoton.     1856.     p.  19. 
Harris,  John.     Navigation  atquo  itinerantium  bibliotheca.     Discovery,  settlement, 

and  commerce  of  the  East  Indies.     Vol.  1,  pp.  506,  811. 
Hemsley.     Biol.  Central-Amer.  I,  p.  123. 
Herkner,   Heinrich.     Die   oberelsassische   Baumwoll-Indnstrie   und   ihre   Arbeiter. 

Strasburg,  1887. 
Hernandez.     Nov.  Hispania  Thes.,  p.  308. 
History  of  cotton,  chapter  in  the.     Amer.,  vol.  3,  p.  99. 
History  of  cotton.     Eclec.  Mag.  59,  p.  59.     Cham.  Jour.,  vol.  39,  p.  136. 
Holland,  J.     Spinners'  guide  and  managers'  assistant. 
Holmes,  Sir  W.     Free  cotton,  how  and  where   to  grow  it;  with  map  of  British 

Guiana. 
Hooker.     Fl.  niger,  p.  229. 
Hooker  and  Arnott.     Bot.  Beechy,  p.  60. 

Horn,  Ignaz  Einhorn.     La  crise  cotonniere  et  les  textiles  indigenes.     1863. 
Hornel,  F.  R.  von.     Ueber  die  Baumwolle.     Schriften  des  Vereins  zur  Verbreitung 

naturw.     Kenntniss  in  Wien,  33  (1893),  pp.  34,  figs.  3. 
Humbolt,  Bonpland,  and  Kunth.     Nov.  pi.  gen.,  V,  293. 
Hunter,  W.  W.     Imperial  Gazetteer  India.     16  vols. 
Hunter.     Orissa.     Vol.  II,  pp.  45, 134,  app.  4. 
Indian  Agricultural  Reports: 

Cotton,  fertilizers.     Rpt.  Cawnpore  Expt.  Sta.,  1891-92,  pp.  8,  9,  21. 

Cotton,  fertilizers  and  treatment  of  seed  with  sulphuric  acid.     Rpt.  Khfindesh 

Exptl.  Farm,  year  ending  Mar.,  1892,  p.  3. 
Cotton.     Rpt.  Cawnpore  Expt.  Sta.,  1890-91,  pp.  4,  5,  6,  19,  22. 
Cotton,  sown  in  mixture  with  castor  and  sesame  beans,  and  Cqjiiius  indicus.     Rpt. 

Cawnpore  Exp.  Sta.,  1891-92,  p.  15. 
Cotton,  rattooned  vs.  unrattooned.     Rpt.  Cawnpore  Exp.  Sta.,  1891-92,  p.  27. 
Cotton,  value   and  yield  per  acre.     Crop   Experiments,   Bombay   Presidency, 

1890-91,  pp.3,  21,  31. 
Cotton,  fertilizers.     Dept.  Agr.  Central  Provinces,  Ind.     Rpt.  of  Nagpur  Exptl. 

Farm,  pp.  2, 13, 14. 
Cotton,  Nankin  vs.  American  varieties.     Rpt.   Dept.  Land  Records  and  Agr., 

Bengal,  year  ending  Mar.,  1892. 
Cotton,  varieties.     Rpt.  Khaudesh  Exptl.  Farm,  year  ending  Mar.,  1892,  pp.  6, 

14,  22,  23. 
Administrative  Reports,  Bombay.     Report  on  growth  of  cotton  in  India. 

Cultivation  of  cotton  in  the  Bombay  Presidency.     Manuscript. 
Indian  Agriculturist,  Oct.  12  and  Nov.  2,  1889. 
Indian  Forester,  vol.  XII,  app.  p.  7;  XIV,  p.  109. 
Indian  Settlements  Reports. 
Land  Records  and  Agricultural  Reports. 

Indian  cotton,  character  of  the  staple  of.     Patent  Office  Rpt.,  1853,  pp.  195-197. 
Jackson,  B.  D.     Vegetable  technology;  bibliography  of  economic  botany. 
Jackson,  John  R.     Commercial  botany  of  the  nineteenth  century. 
Jackson,  P.  T.     New  York  convention.     Report  on  the  product  and  manufacture  of 

cotton.     Boston,  1832. 
Jacquin.     Eclog.  Plantarum  v.  II  (1844). 
James,  C.  T.     Cultivation  and  manufacture  of  cotton.     Hunt.     Vol.  25,  pp.  195,  290; 

also  sep.  vol.     N.  Y.,  1850. 
Jardin,  M.  E.     Le  coton,  son  historie,  son  habitat,  son  einploi.     1881. 


SUPPLEMENTAL    BIBLIOGRAPHY    OF    COTTON.  429 

Jones,  Joseph.     First  report  to  the  cotton  planters'  association  of  Georgia.      1860. 

pp.  136,  301. 
Jour.  Society  of  Arts,  July  27,  1883. 

Judd,  O.     Analysis  of  the  ash  of  a  cotton  stalk.     In  Am.  Asso.  Proc.  v.  6, 1852. 
Kennedy,  A.     Practical  cotton  spinner.     London,  1852. 
Kerr,  W.  C.     Cotton  production  of  North  Carolina  and  Virginia.     Tenth  Census, 

vol.  6. 
King  cotton  and  his  gin.     Atlantic,  40,  p.  188. 
Kingsborongh,  R.  (Earl  of  Kingston).     Antiquitie  Mexicans.     Vol.  V,  p.  217;  Vol. 

VII.     London,  1830-18. 
Kittredge,  Henry  G.     U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Libr.  Scrapbook  "Cotton."     pp.  1-7. 
Kurz.     Forest  Flora  of  British  Burmah  I.     p.  129. 
Lahat,  Jean  Baptiste.     History  of  the  West  Indies.      New  Voyage  on  Islands  of 

America.     2  v.   Le  Haye,  1724. 
Lamarck.     Encyl.,  vol.  2,  p.  133  (1786). 

111.  gen.,  tab.  586,  fig.  1. 

Lang,  J.D.     Cooksland  in  Northeastern  Australia,  tbe  future  cotton  field  of  Great 

Britain.     London,  1847. 
Latham,  Alexander  &  Co.,  N.  Y.     Movement  and  fluctuation  of  cotton,  1888-1893? 

1893-94. 
Le  Brun,  Cornille.     Voyage  an  Levant  (Malta). 

Lee,  Henry.     The  vegetable  lamb  of  Tartary.     A  curious  fable  of  the  cotton  plant. 
Lees,  W.  N.     Tea  cultivation,  cotton,  and  other  agricultural  experiments  in  India. 

London,  1863. 
Leigh,  W.     Practical  cotton  spinner.     1866. 
Liebig,  J.  von.     Die  Chemie  in  ihrer  Anwendung  auf  Agrikultur  und  Physiologie. 

Braunschweig,  1862. 
Lindley.     Vegetable  kingdom,  p.  270. 
Linnaeus.     Diss.  Acad.     Vol.  VIII  (1775). 

Flora  Zeylon,  p.  99. 

Hort.  Cliffortianus  (1737). 

Hort.  Upsaliensis  (1748). 

In  Mantissa,  p.  436. 

Mat.  Med.  libr.  1  (1749). 

Sp.  PI.  ed.  I,  p.  693  (1753). 

Sp.  PI.  ed.  II  (1762-63). 

Syst.  veg.  ed.  X,  XII. 


Linschoten,  Jan  Huijghen  Van.     Le  grand  routier  de  mer,  la  navigation  des  Ind. 

Orient.,  et  de  la  coste  du  Bresil,  etc.,  pt.  Ill,  c.  9.     Amsterdam,  1638. 

Voyage  to  East  Indies.     Vol.  I,  pp.  55,  60,  95, 125. 

Lister,  John.     Cotton  manufacture:  A  manual  of  practical  instruction,  etc.,  for  the 

use  of  operatives,  overlookers,  etc.     London,  1894. 
Loudon,  Encyclopedia  of  plants.     Cotton.     London,  1855. 
Loureiro,  J.  de.     Algoda  o  sua  cultura  e  fabrica.     In  Lisbon  Ac.  d.  Sci.  Mem.     V.  1, 

1789. 
Lyman,  Joseph  B.     Cotton  planting.     Dept.  Agr.  Rpt.,  1866,  pp.  193-211. 
MacFayden.     Fl.  Jamaica,  p.  72. 

McCay,  C.  F.     Cultivation  of  cotton;  eighty  years'  progress  in  the  United  States. 
McCullough,  J.  R.     Dictionary  of  commerce.     London,  1832.     New  ed.,  1869. 
McHenry,  G.     The  cotton  trade,  its  bearing  upon  the  prosperity  of  Great  Britain 

and  commerce  of  the  American  republics.     London,  1863. 
Mann,  J.  A.     The  cotton  trade  of  Great  Britain,  its  rise,  progress,  and  present  extent. 

London,  1860. 
Marcgrave.     Brazil,  p.  52. 
Marsden,  Richard.     Cotton   spinning,   its   development,   principles,   and  practice. 

London,  1884. 


430  THE    COTTON    PLANT. 

Mason.     Burma  and  its  people,  pp.  518,  756. 

Massalsks,  Prince  V.  I.     Cotton  industry  in  Central  Asia  (Turkestan,  Transcaspian 

region,  Bokhara,  and  Khiva)  and  its  future.     St.  Petersburg,  1892.     pp.  166 

(in  Russian  language). 
Masscre,  George.     The  plant  world,  its  past,  present,  and  future.     London,  1891. 
Masters.     In  Oliver's  PI.  trop.  Africa,     p.  210. 
Matheson,  E.     Cotton  baling  presses.     1870. 
Mauri.     Tenore  in  Catalog.  Hort.  Bot.     Napoli  (1845). 
Medlicott.     Cotton  handbook  for  Bengal,  1862. 
Meyen.     Reis  11,  p.  323. 
Meyen,  F.  J.  F.     Outlines  of  the  geography  of  plants;    with   particular  inquiries 

concerning  the  principal  plants  on  which  the  prosperity  of  nations  is  based. 

London,  1846. 
Middletou,  T.  H.     Indian  cultivated  cottons.     Agl.  Ledger,  1895.    No.  8.     pp.  vm,  27. 
Milburn,  William.     Oriental  commerce.     2  vols.     Loudon,  1813. 
Mill,  James.     History  of  British  India.     3d  ed.     London,  1826.     6  vols. 
Miller,  Philip.     Gardener's  Dictionary. 
Montgomery,  J.     Practical  detail  of  the  cotton  manufacture  of  the  United  States 

Glasgow,  1850. 
Moore,  J.  M.     History  of  North  Caroliua  to  the  present  time.     2  vols.     Raleigh,  1880. 
Moris.     Fl.  sard.     I,  p.  309. 

Morison.     PI.  hist.  oxon.     3,  p.  517,  sect.  12,  tab.  17,  ic.  1. 
Mndge,  E.  R.     Report  on  cotton;  with  a  supplemental  report  by  B.  F.  Nourse.     In 

U.  S.  Comm.  for  the  Paris  Expos.,  1867.     Reports,  v.  6. 
Mueller,  F.     Frag.  phyt.  Austr.     Vols.  I,  p.  46;  III,  p.  6;  V,  pp.  44,  177;  VI,  p.  169; 

IX,  pp.  122,  127. 
Mulhall,  M.  G.     Cotton  fields  of  Paraguay  and  Corrientes.     Buenos  Ayres,  1860. 
Mulhouse,  les  publications  de  la  soci6te"  de. 
Muller,  C.     In  VValp.  Ann.  Bot.     VII,  p.  408. 
Murfee,  W.  L.     Culture  of  cotton.     Lip.     Vol.  29,  p.  450. 
Murray.     Comm.  Sci.  Gotting.     Vol.  7,  p.  17  (1776). 
Nasmith,  J.     The  students'  cotton  spinning.     2d  ed. 
Ninet,  John.     La  Culture  du  coton  en  Egypte  et  aux  Indes.     1866. 
Nordhoff,  Charles.     Cotton  States  in  the  spring  and  summer  of  1875.     New  York, 

1876. 
Nuttall,  T.     Genera  of  North  American  Plants. 

In  Seemann  fl.  vit.  p.  22  (1865),  p.  426  (1873). 

Olmstead,  F.  L .     The  Cotton  kingdom  [186 1  ] .     New  York,  1862 . 

Orme,  Robert.     Historical  fragments  Mogul  Empire.     1659-1800.     London,  1805. 

Ozanne,  J.  W.     Three  years  in  Roumania. 

Parkinson,  John.     Theatr.  bot.  ex  Volk.  fl.  norimb.,  p.  195. 

Pastoral  life  and  manufacture  of  ancients. 

Peez,  Alex.,  and  Glogau,  L.     Baumwolle  uud  Baumwaren.     (Vienna)  1873. 

Pendleton,  E.  M.     Southern  Cultivator,  1869,  p.  381. 

Perennial  cotton.     U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Libr.  Scrapbook,  "Cotton."     pp.  8, 15. 

Persoon.     Syn.pl.  2. 

Pickering,  C.     Chronological  history  of  plants. 

Piddington.     Index. 

Pitkin.     Statistical  view  of  the  commerce  of  the  United  States. 

Planters  and  Manufacturers'  Association,  Report  for  1868. 

Plukenet.     Almagestrum  botanicum,  1696,  p.  107. 

Phyt.  188,  fig.  1. 

Poate,  T.  B.     Cotton  in  Japan.     Trans.  Asiatic  Soc.  of  Japan,  vol.  4,  5,  p.  145. 

Poiret.     Diet.  enc.  supp.  II,  p.  369. 

Postlethwayt,  M.     Univ.  diet,  de  commerce.     3d  ed.     2  vols.     London,  1766. 

Poulain,  H.     Production  du  coton  dans  nos  colonies.     Paris,  1863. 

Pray,  T.     The  cotton  fiber.     Jour.  Franklin  Inst.     Vol.  128,  p.  241. 


SUPPLEMENTAL    BIBLIOGRAPHY    OF    COTTON.  431 

Present  and  future  supply  of  cotton.     De  Bow,  vol.  22,  p.  197. 

Prescott.     History  of  the  Conquest  of  Mexico.     Vol.  II,  pp.  13,  39, 454. 

Pringle,  C.  D.     Cotton  iu  Australia.     Once  a  Week.     Vol.  14,  p.  501. 

Ramsay,  David.     History  of  South  Carolina,  1670-1808.     Charleston,  1809.     2  vols. 

Raumer,  Fr.  von.    Historisches  Taschenbuch.    (Das  VerkehrslebeninAlterthiim,  etc.) 

Rawle,  J.     Origin  and  progress  of  cotton  cultivation  in  America.     De  Bow,  vol.  17, 

p.  426. 
Raynal,  Guillaume  Thomas  Francis.     Histoire  phil.  et  polit.  des  etablissements  et 

du  commerce  des  Deux  Indes.     11  vols.     1774. 
Reichenbach.     Icon.  fl.  germ.  5,  p.  20,  tab.  180. 
Reports  and  documents  connected  with  the  proceedings  of  the  East  India  Company 

in  regard  to  the  culture  aud  manufacture  of  cotton,  wool,  silk,  and  indigo. 

London,  1836. 
Reybaud,  M.  R.  L.     Le  coton,  son  regime,  ses  problemes,  son  influence  en  Europe. 

Paris,  1863. 

La  culture  des  coton  en  Algerie.     1864. 

Reynier.     Economie  des  Arabes  et  des  Juifs.     p.  363. 

Rheede.     Hort.  Malab.,  p.  55,  tab.  31. 

Rhinds.     Vegetable  kingdom,     pp.  405-413. 

Richard.     The  production  of  textile  libers,  1881.     pp.  200. 

Rivett-Carnac,  H.     Report  on  cotton  department.     India,  1868-69. 

Robertson,  William.     Historical  disquisition  concerning  the  knowledge  the  Ancients 

had  of  India.     Dublin,  1791.     Same,  4th  ed.     London,  1804. 
Robinson,  W.     History  of  India.  * 

Rohn.     Classification  of  cotton  in  Turner's  cotton  planter's  manual,  p.  94. 
Rohr,  J.  P.  B.  von.     Anmerkungen  fiber  den  Cottonbau.     2  parts.     1791-1793. 
Romans,  Bernard.     Florida,     pp.211, 212. 

Rosellini.     Monumenta  della  Egizia,  p.  2.     Monum.  Civ.  I,  p.  60. 
Rosenmiiller,  Ernest  Friedrich  Karl.     Handbuch  der  biblischen  Alterkunde.     Vol. 

IV.     Leipzig,  1830.     9  v.  20  pts. 
Roxbourgh,  Wm.     Flora  of  India.     1832. 
Observations  on  fibrous  vegetables  of  India.     College  pamphlets  Yale  Univ. 

No.  588. 
Royle,  J.  F.     Fibrous  plants,     p.  247.     London,  1855. 

111.  himal.,  p.  98. 

Ruiz  y  Sandoval,  Alberto.     El  Algodon  en  Mexico.     1884. 

Rumph.     Herb.  Amb.  4,  p.  57,  tab.  13. 

Rutherford,  W.,  jr.     Southern  Cultivator,  1851.     p.  20. 

Ryan,  John.     Preparation  of  long  line,  flax  cotton  and  flax  wool,  by  the  Claussen 

process,     p.  104.     London,  1852. 
Sachs,  Julius  von.     History  of  botan/  (1530-1860),  revised  by  I.  B.  Balfour.     Oxford, 

1890. 

Lectures  on  the  physiology  of  plants,  trans,  by  Ward.     Oxford,  1887. 

Savorgnan  D'Osoppo,  M.  A.     Piantes  tessili,  con  un  dizionario  delle  industrie  tessili. 

Gossypium.     pp.  291-320. 
Schoolcraft,  Henry  R.     Information  respecting  history,  condition,  and  prospects  of 

Indiamtribes  of  United  States.     Vol.  Ill,  p.  38.     1847. 
Schouw.     Naturschilderungeu.     p.  152. 

Scott,  R.     Practical  cotton  spinner.     4th  ed.     London,  1860. 
Sea  Island  cotton,  couutry,  and  cultivation.     Cham.  Jour.,  vol.  60,  p.  425;  Liv.  Age, 

vol.  158,  p.  37. 
Seemann.     Jour.  Bot,  (1866),  p.  268. 

Fl.  Vitiens.     p.  22. 

Sen,  A.  C.     Report  on  the  system  of  agriculture  and  agricultural  statistics  of  the 

Dacca  District.     Bengal,  1889. 
Shaw,  A.  N.     Cotton  in  India.     Jour.  Soc.  Arts,  vol.  11,  p.  235. 


432  THE    COTTON   PLANT. 

Sicard,  Adrien.     Guide  pratique  de  la  culture  du  cotou.     Paris,  1866. 

Sinmionds,  P.  L.     Tropical  agriculture,     pp.  404,  405. 

Simms,  W.  G.     The  power  of  cotton.     New  York,  1856. 

Sind  Gazetteer.     Vols.  X,  XIII,  etc. 

Siusabaugli  aud  Tipton.     Digest  cotton-bale  ties'  patents.     Washington,  1861. 

Sloane.     Cat.  Jamaica,  .p.  156. 

Smith,  Adam.     Wealth  of  nations. 

Smith,  R.  M.     Cotton  supply  question  in  relation  to  resources  of  India. 

Snell,  D.  W.     The  managers'  assistant:  A  condensed  treatise  on  cotton  manufacture. 

Hartford,  1850. 
Solander.     Flora  of  Pacific  Islands,     p.  274. 

Sou  they,  Eobert.     History  of  Brazil.     London,  1810-1819.     3  vols. 
Spach.     Hist,  des  veg.  phau.  3,  p.  392. 

Spencer,  E.     Problem  of  cotton  supply.     So.  M.,  vol.  13,  p.  680. 
Sprengel,  Curtiss.     Historia  rei  Hebari.Ee.     Amsterdam,  1807.     2  vols. 
Sprengel.     Syst.  Veget.  Ill,  95,  96.  • 

Staden,  Hans.     Mem.  Hist.  Prov.  Bras.  3,  Ind.  Occ.  c.  38. 
Starnes,  H.  N.     Cotton  harvester.     Southern  Biv.,  vol.  4,  pp.  693,  706. 
Stephan,  H.     Das  Verkehrsleben  im  Alterthum  und  im  Mittelalter.     Hist.  Taschen- 

buch,  1868. 
Steudel,  Ernest  Gottlieb.     Nomen.  bot.,  ed.  2,  p.  702.     Stuttgart,  1824. 
Strong,  J.  L.     Cotton  in  California.     Overland  Monthly  (1871),  6,  p.  326. 
Summer,  Thos.  J.    Analysis  of  the  cotton  plant  and  seed,  with  suggestions  as  to 

manures.     Columbia,  1848.* 
Supply  of  cotton.     All  the  Year.     Vol.  6,  p.  256. 
Swartz.     In  Kongl.  Vetens.  Acad.  II,  1790,  p.  22. 

Obs.  hot.,  p.  265. 

Sypher,  J.  R.     Cotton  seed  and  its  uses. 

Taratinoff,  N.  P.    Cotton  culture  in  Trans-Caucasus.    Tiflis,  1889.    pp.  54.    In  Russian 

language. 
Targioni.     Inst.  bot.  Ill,  p.  98. 
Taylor,  James.     Remarks  to  "Sequel  Periplus  of  the  Erythrean  Sea."    Jour.  Asiat. 

Soc.     Bengal.  f 

Taylor,  John.     Concerning  renovation  of  land  by  animal  and  vegetable  matter.    1808. 
Taylor,  John  T.     Cotton  weaving  and  designing.     London,  1893. 
Taylor,  W.  C.     Handbook  of  silk,  cotton,  and  woolen  manufacture.     London,  1843. 
Thompson,  W.     Preventing  mildew  in  cotton-goods  sizing. 
Thorpe,  T.  B.     Cultivation  of  cottou.     Harper,  vol.  8,  p.  447. 
Todaro.     Rel.  cotoni  coltivati.     Atti  Soc.  Acclimat.  e  Agric.  in  Sicilia,  torn.  5,  Nos.  1 

and  2. 

Rel.  colt.  cot.  Reale  Orto  Botanico  di  Palmero.      1876. 

■  Ind.  sem.  hort.  bot.  pan.  1866,  p.  16. 

Osserv.  spec.  cot.  colt,  in  Palmero  (1863).      Giorn.  Real.  Inst,   d' Incoragg.  in 

Sicily,  ser.  3,  1. 

Gen.  cot.  1877-78. 

Torrey.     Bot.  Mex.  Bound.  Surv.,  pt.  6. 

Torrey  and  Gray.     Flora  of  North  America.     I,  p.  230.  * 

Tournefort.     Inst.  p.  101,  tab.  27.     Voy.  du  Levant,     p.  167. 

Triana  and  Planchon.     Prod.  Flora  Novo-Granatensis.     p.  170. 

Tussac.     Fl.  Antilles,  n.  2,  tab.  17. 

Ulrich,  L.     Complete  treatise  on  the  art  of  dyeing.     1863. 

Ure,  A.     Cotton  manufacture  of  great  Britain  systematically  investigated.     2  vols. 

London,  1836. 
Vaillant.     Culture  du  cotou  in  Algerie.     1855,  p.  40;  1856,  p.  36. 
Varieties  of  cotton.     De  Bow,  vol.  18,  p.  177. 
Velloso,  Jose.     Fl.  flum.  7,  tab.  29,  edit.  Arrabida. 


SUPPLEMENTAL    BIBLIOGRAPHY    OF    COTTON.  433 

ie,  J.     Traite  de  botanique.     Cotonnier.    pp.  474-478. 
\'nk  H.  VV.     Methods  of  improving  varieties  of  cotton  and  descriptions  of  varieties 

or  strains.     Southern  Cultivator.     1851.     pp.  129-131. 
I   ker,  A.     Improvement  of  Indian  agriculture.     1893.     pp.  418. 
■  ers.     Ann.  hot.  II,  p.  149. 

Rep.  V,  p.  149. 

pfard,  Sir  Henry  George.     Mexico  in  1827.     Vol.  1,  pp.  79,  80. 

;   rson.     Cyclopedia  of  commerce 
IvVatson,  J.  Forbes.     Report  on  cotton  gins,  cleaning  and  quality  of  Indian  cotton. 

— Cotton  in  India.     Jour.  Soc.  Ar^s,  vol.  7,  p.  278. 

Watts,  J.     Facts  of  the  cotton  famine  (in  England).     London,  1866. 

W.mgh,  Edwin.     Cotton  folk  during  famine. 

Wawra  and  Peyrit.     Sert.  Beng.,  pp.  20-22. 

Webber,  S.     History  and  manufacture  of  cotton  goods,  U.  S.     New  York,  1879. 

"Wheeler,  J.  Talboys.     Cultivation  of  cotton  in  Madras  vs.  America.     1866. 

•%■ Handbook  of  cotton  in  Madras.     London,  1865. 

Handbook  of  cotton  cultivation,  Madras  Presidency.     London,  1863. 

History  of  India  from  earliest  ages.     London,  1867-1876.     4  vols. 

White,  G.  S.     History  of  the  rise  and  progress  of  cotton  manufacture  in  England 

and  America.     Philadelphia,  1836. 
Wiesner,  Julius.     Die  Entstehung  des  Chlorophyll  in  der  Pflanze.     Wien,  1877. 
Wight.     Icon.  PI.  ind.  orient,  tab.  9,  10,  11. 

Illust.  ind.  hot.  84,  tab.  28,  C. 

Wight  and  Arnott.     Flora  of  India. 

Wilkinson.     Manners  and  customs  of  the  ancient  Egyptians.     Loudon,  vols.  8, 1837; 

Vol.  Ill,  p.  115. 

Topography  of  Thebes.     Londou,  1835. 

Willdenow.     Sp.  pi.  3,  pp.  804,  809. 

William,  C.  P.     Cotton.     Chamb.  Jour.,  vol.  39,  p.  136;  Liv.  Age,  vol.  68,  p.  546. 
Wilson,  Erasmus.     Brigg's  paper  on  cotton.     Report  Roy.  Asiat.  Soc.  London.     Pro- 
ceedings of  the  Com.  of  Commerce  and  Agriculture.     1840.     App.  p.  48-52. 
Wilson,  Samuel.     An  account  of  the  Province  of  Carolina  in  America.     London,  1682. 
Winckelmann,  Johann  J.     Geschichte  der  Kunst  des  Alterthums.     Dresden,  1812. 

Vol.  Ill,  Book  VI,  Chap.  I,  p.  5;  note  9,  p.  315. 
Woodbury,  Levi.     A  letter  of  the  Secy,  of  Treasury,  &c,  &c,  to  James  K.  Polk, 

Speaker  of  the  House.     Feb.  29,  1836. 
Tables  and  notes  on  the  cultivation,  manufacture,  and  foreign  trade  of  cotton. 

Washington,  1836. 
Wray,  L.     Cotton  culture  and  preparation  in  the  United  States.     Jour.  Soc.  Arts, 

vol.  7,  p.  77. 
Wylie,  M.     Commerce  and  resources  and  prospects  of  India.     London,  1857. 
Yates,  J.     Textriuum  Antiquorum.     Londou,  8,  I,  p.  348.     App.  D,  p.  458. 
Yeates,  John.     Natural  history  of  the  raw  materials  of  commerce.     Londou,  1872. 
Young,  P.  M.  B.     Cotton  Culture.     Paris  Exposition  Reports,  Dept.  of  State. 
Zanoni.     Hist,  hot.,  p.  40. 

1993— No.  33 28 


* 


t 


r 


f^^^Jp^ci' 


a  flu    i  HHi  II H  ufl  nlf  i     Jh  I  ymiUflHliMiH  flnmn  !!    «  IHil 
lllSllSISBIi  IB  illl        HfiHIHl 

Hal  tinliuiililunlliRiIuUln  *™*  IWpw  HmRI 

HI  mffltism  11    H    IhhHh  m     Bffiffi  H 

llni   InP  m    Hi    IM 

HHfl^^H^^Hi 

g|  |H  ws&  mm 

■■■I  §1111   HHi  HI 

11   ill  81    11    HHi 

m      111     ill  B I  HI 

ilia    fliH       1  H  wM 


H         BUB 


hHHNI 

mmmmmwm 


warn 

ilMKMiMMBlHffitmH  \W       W  w  BHi  HI 

Wat    lifftfit1  ntlttn    RHRffi    mfHittulraiiBi]  ffittnmnitt1         iin  nnH 
1 1  ffltftt  JIhHhIi  H       Iwwf  I  fllBilHluiS  IBBlmljmHll 

BBgawHWi     MflfBIHl  HHHI       Hlffi    UltiU]      Hnwiro  llHH 

IfilHlltt^hHiiflni^^^^Hl 


Mill 


IMP 


I— BHM 

{StttttfBBlQll   ^Hnm    HBH 


mm  HS  Inlilr  imffijffl 


